Scientometric analysis of nature, the journal

300,000 reports inNature during the 1869–1998 period have been reviewed. The distribution of articles by subfields was determined. Additional sources of information were several journals on analytical chemistry and papers at the Pittsburg conference series during 1950–1999. The methodology used is based on the analysis of the average age of employed instruments. The agreement between scientometric data from various sources of information depends on the development stage of the field of science. Calculated and measured scientometric curves were compared. One of the key trends in the development of basic sciences, namely, the increase of articles dealing with instrumental analytical chemistry, inNature is revealed. The research was supported by the Russian Foundation of Basic Research (Project No. 97-06-80163a) and State Target Programme "Integracia" (Project No. 670).     

Nalimov and the Polish Way Towards Science of Science

Nalimov's relations with Polish scientists date from the sixties. He was present in Polish science owing to his publication — also specially prepared for Polish journals — and for his participation in Polish-Soviet science of science conferences organized alternately in Poland and in (of that time) Soviet Union. He had a high opinion — which he many times expressed — on contemporary condition of Polish science of science as well as on its previous achievements. In such opinion he was not isolated; also John Bernal and Derek de Solla Price referred in their papers to precursory statements of Maria and Stanisław Ossowski formulating already in the thirties of XX century progressive programme for science of science research. Ten years earlier a similar views upon science presented world-famous Polish sociologist Florian Znaniecki. So, in the first part of the paper a common way of thinking and approaching science of science basic problems in Ossowski's, Znaniecki's and Nalimov's works is presented. In the second part the direct contacts of Nalimov with Polish science of science researchers widely described and commentated in Polish journals are discussed. At least using citation analysis the influence of Nalimov's ideas on science of science and scientometrics in Poland is presented. As a base to citation analysis the journal Problems of the Science of Science (1965–1999) and monographs devoted to scientometrics, bibliometrics and informetrics were taken. This revised version was published online in June 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date. This revised version was published online in June 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date. This revised version was published online in June 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

International contribution to library and information science in Poland: A bibliometric analysis

This article reports findings from the study of the international contribution to the system of library and information science communication in Poland in the years 2003–2005. The sample consists of articles published both in selected journals and collective works. Two important dimensions determining the internationalization of local scholarly communication are considered: direct contribution (foreign authors’ articles and papers and their translations published in Poland) and indirect contribution (citedness of foreign authors’ documents in articles and papers published in Poland). Bibliographic data about the geographical distribution and affiliation of foreign authors are gathered and analyzed. Furthermore, the findings of citation analysis are presented to determine the percentage share of citations received by foreign documents as well as to find out what is the structure of such citations regarding the language and form, which thematic areas are most replete with such citations and which foreign journals are most cited in Poland.     

Mathematics Research in India Today: What Does the Literature Reveal?

Mathematics research in India, as reflected by papers indexed inMathsci 1988–1998, is quantified and mapped. Statistics, quantum theory and general topology are the three subfields contributing the most to India's output in mathematics research, followed by special functions, economics and operations research, and relativity and gravitational theory. Indian Statistical Institute and Tata Institute of Fundamental Research are the two leading publishers of research papers. Unlike in many other fields, Calcutta publishes the largest number of papers in mathematics, followed by Mumbai, New Delhi, Chennai and Bangalore. West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Delhi are the leading states. Researchers from 257 institutions spread over 134 cities/towns have published 17,308 papers in the 11 years. About 92% of these papers have appeared in 877 journals published from 62 countries. Journals published in the USA, UK and the Netherlands are popular with Indian mathematicians. Of the 36 journals that have published at least a hundred papers, 20 are Indian journals of which only two are indexed in Journal Citation Reports. In all, about 38.5% of papers have been published in Indian journals, as against about 70% in agriculture, 55% in life sciences, 33.5% in medicine and 20% in physics. In the later years, there has been a moderate shift to non-Indian journals. Close to 78% of papers have come from universities and colleges and 13% from the institutions under science related departments. Almost all papers in high impact journals are physics related and most of them have come from institutions under the Department of Atomic Energy. Over 15% of the 9760 papers published during 1993–1998 are internationally coauthored. In all of science, as seen from Science Citation Index, 14% of Indian papers were internationally coauthored in 1991 and 17.6% in 1998. The USA, Canada, and Germany are the important collaborating nations, followed by France, Italy, Japan and the UK. This revised version was published online in June 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date. This revised version was published online in June 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date. This revised version was published online in June 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Dermatological scientific production from European Union authors (1987–2000)

To evaluate the contribution to international dermatological literature made by authors from European Union (EU) countries. Using MedLine, a selection was made of articles by EU authors published between 1987 and 2000 in 32 dermatological journals, classified as such by the Institute for Scientific Information. Overall 19,225 documents were published by European authors in the selected dermatological journals from 1987 to 2000. The leading countries in terms of output were the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy and France. The leading countries in number of articles after taking into account the gross domestic product and the population were Denmark, Finland and Sweden. The main journals were the British Journal of Dermatology(14.5% of articles from European authors), Contact Dermatitis (13.7%), Journal of Investigative Dermatology (7.3%),Journal of American Academy of Dermatology (6.4%), andActa Dermato-Venereologica (6.1%). The country with the highest output of papers by journal was the United Kingdom (11 journals) followed by Germany (9 journals), Italy (6 journals), France (3 journals), Spain (2 journals) and Sweden (1 journal). In conclusions: the scientific production of European Union research on dermatology is highest in northern countries. This revised version was published online in June 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

The global science base of information and communication technologiges: Bibliometric analysis of ICT research papers

The science and engineering base is a key source of knowledge for the development and use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs). In order to be able to effectively describe and monitor world-wide scientific activity related to ICTs, it is important to be able to provide reliable macro-level statistics of this knowledge base. International bibliographic databases and related bibliometric indicators together provide an analytical framework and appropriate measures to cover both the ‘supply side’—research capabilities and outputs—and ‘demand side’—collaboration, diffusion and citation impact—related to the ICT research. This paper presents results of such a bibliometric study describing macro-level features of this ICT knowledge base. The data were retrieved from a specially developedCWTS ICT Database which provides a broad-scope world-wide coverage of ICT-relevant research papers published in high-quality international scientific and technical journals. The cross-country comparison focuses on the level of scientific output and co-operation patterns of the most actively publishing nations with a focus on the three Triad zones—the European Union, the USA and Japan.     

The business of being an editor: Norman Lockyer,Macmillan and Company,and the editorship of Nature, 1869–1919

Broadly speaking, Victorian scientific periodicals fell into one of two categories: specialist periodicals aimed at publishing original research for an audience of scientific researchers, or popularizing periodicals meant to share news about science with a broader readership. When astronomer Norman Lockyer founded Nature in 1869, he envisioned his new weekly as a member of the latter group. That vision resulted partly from his own wish to raise science's profile in Great Britain and partly from the interests of his publisher Macmillan and Company, which bankrolled Nature with its eye on eventual profit. This paper shows that the pressure for Nature to be a financial success shaped Lockyer's approach to editing and thus shaped Nature's content, leading the magazine to occupy an unusual space in the landscape of Victorian science publishing and placing unique burdens on its editor. Nature quickly moved away from Lockyer's initial vision of a popularizing magazine and became known as a periodical by and for researchers. The magazine's popularity among scientific researchers set it apart from its closest inspiration, the commercial weekly Chemical News. But in contrast to contemporary editors at learned society journals, such as George Gabriel Stokes at the Philosophical Transactions, Lockyer did not linger over the scientific details of Nature's papers. Instead, articles for Nature were usually either accepted or rejected immediately, with little editorial involvement shaping their scientific content. The difference between editing Nature and editing other research periodicals is clearly visible in the selection of Richard Gregory as Lockyer's successor in 1919. Most research periodicals selected eminent men of science as their editors-in-chief. Gregory, a science writer and long-time subeditor at Nature, did not lend scientific prestige to the masthead, but was eminently qualified to maintain Nature's distinctive content and its profitability for Macmillan and Company.     

Analysis of the medical and biological pain research literature in the European Union: A 2006 snapshot

This study analyzed 2443 papers published in 2006 by European Union authors on pain-related research. Five EU countries (the UK, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and France) each published > 200 papers while three countries (Cyprus, Malta and Estonia) published none; socio-economic indicators were related to each country’s productivity. The 2443 papers were published in 592 journals and Cephalalgia, Pain and European Journal of Pain were the most prolific. Publications were also analyzed for intra- versus inter-EU/non-EU collaborations and subdisciplines profiles in Clinical Medicine and the Life Sciences for the World, USA, EU and the top-four EU countries were compared.     

Scholarly gratitude in five geographical contexts: a diachronic and cross-generic approach of the acknowledgment paratext in medical discourse (1950–2010)

This study analyzed the use of acknowledgements in medical articles published in five countries (Venezuela, Spain, France, UK and USA) from 1950 to 2010. For each country, we selected 54 papers (18 research papers, 18 reviews and 18 case reports), evenly distributed over six decades, from two medical journals with the highest impact factors. Only papers written by native speakers in the national language were included. The evolution of the frequency and length of acknowledgments was analyzed. Of 270 articles studied, 127 (47%) had acknowledgments. The presence of acknowledgments was associated with country (p = 0.001), this section being more common and longer in US and UK journals. Acknowledgments were most common in research papers (70 vs. 40% in case reports and 31% in reviews, p < 0.001). Reviews without acknowledgments were significantly more common than those with (69 vs. 31%), but there was no trend in case reports. Altogether, articles with acknowledgments predominated only after 2000. Since the frequency of use of acknowledgments remained stable over time in US and UK journals but increased in non-Anglophone journals, the overall increase is attributed to the change in non-English publications. Authors acknowledged sub-authorship more in English language journals than in those published in the national language in France, Spain and Venezuela. However, the practice of acknowledging is increasing in non-Anglophone journals. We conclude that the concept of intellectual indebtedness does not only differ from one geographical context to another, but also over time and from one academic genre to another.     

Mapping interdisciplinarity at the interfaces between the Science Citation Index and the Social Science Citation Index

The two Journal Citation Reports of the Science Citation Index 2004 and the Social Science Citation Index 2004 were combined in order to analyze and map journals and specialties at the edges and in the overlap between the two databases. For journals which belong to the overlap (e.g., Scientometrics), the merger mainly enriches our insight into the structure which can be obtained from the two databases separately; but in the case of scientific journals which are more marginal in either database, the combination can provide a new perspective on the position and function of these journals (e.g., Environment and Planning B — Planning and Design). The combined database additionally enables us to map citation environments in terms of the various specialties comprehensively. Using the vector-space model, visualizations are provided for specialties that are parts of the overlap (information science, science & technology studies). On the basis of the resulting visualizations, “betweenness” — a measure from social network analysis — is suggested as an indicator for measuring the interdisciplinarity of journals.     

What makes an article influential? Predicting impact in social and personality psychology

Factors contributing to citation impact in social-personality psychology were examined in a bibliometric study of articles published in the field’s three major journals. Impact was operationalized as citations accrued over 10 years by 308 articles published in 1996, and predictors were assessed using multiple databases and trained coders. Predictors included author characteristics (i.e., number, gender, nationality, eminence), institutional factors (i.e., university prestige, journal prestige, grant support), features of article organization (i.e., title characteristics, number of studies, figures and tables, number and recency of references), and research approach (i.e., topic area, methodology). Multivariate analyses demonstrated several strong predictors of impact, including first author eminence, having a more senior later author, journal prestige, article length, and number and recency of references. Many other variables — e.g., author gender and nationality, collaboration, university prestige, grant support, title catchiness, number of studies, experimental vs. correlational methodology, topic area — did not predict impact.     

Characteristics and impact of grant-funded research: a case study of the library and information science field

This paper reports on a bibliometric study of the characteristics and impact of research in the library and information science (LIS) field which was funded through research grant programs, and compares it with research that received no extra funding. Seven core LIS journals were examined to identify articles published in 1998 that acknowledge research grant funding. The distribution of these articles by various criteria (e.g., topic, affiliation, funding agency) was determined. Their impact as indicated by citation counts during 1998–2008 was evaluated against that of articles without acknowledging extra funding and published in the same journals in the same year using citation data collected from Scopus’ Citation Tracker. The impact of grant-funded research as measured by citation counts was substantially higher than that of other research, both overall and in each journal individually. Scholars from outside LIS core institutions contributed heavily to grant-funded research. The two highest-impact publications by far reported non-grant-based research, and grant-based funding of research reported in core LIS journals was biased towards the information retrieval (IR) area, particularly towards research on IR systems. The percentage of articles reporting grant-funded research was substantially higher in information-oriented journals than in library-focused ones.     

Can a bibliometric indicator predict the success of an analgesic?

In the assessment of success of new analgesic drugs over the past 50 years (Kissin, Anesth Analg 110:780–789, 2010) we observed a difference in the publication response to a new drug between biomedical journals in general and top journals: number of published articles on a drug increased (and declined) more rapidly in the top journals. Based on this phenomenon we present a new publication indicator—the Top Journal Selectivity Index (TJSI). It represents the ratio between the number of all types of articles in the top 20 biomedical journals and the number of articles in all (>5,000) journals covered by Medline, over 5 years after a drug’s introduction. Ten analgesics developed during the period 1986–2009 were selected for analysis. Three publication indices were used for assessment: the number of all types of articles presented in Medline, the number of articles covering only randomized controlled trials (RCT), and the Top Journal Selectivity Index. We also assessed the success score in the development of these analgesics based on the following criteria: novelty of molecular target, analgesic efficacy, and response by the pharmaceutical market. The relationships between the publication indices and analgesic’s success score were determined with the use of the Pearson correlation coefficient. Positive relationship was found only with the Top Journal Selectivity Index (r = 0.876, p < 0.001). We suggest that this index can predict success in drug development at least in the field of analgesics.     

The classification of biomedical journals by research level

A new method of classification of biomedical research journals by research level (RL) into clinical or basic, or somewhere in between, is described that updates the system developed by CHI Research Inc. nearly 30 years ago. It is based on counting articles that have one of about 100 “clinical” title words, or one of a similar number of “basic” title words, or both. It allows over 3000 journals in the Science Citation Index (or other databases) to be classified rapidly and transparently, for changes in their research level with time, and for many individual papers in “mixed” journals to be categorised as clinical or basic. This revised version was published online in June 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Citedness and uncitedness of cancer articles

There is a rapid growth of cancer literature. Thousands of papers are being regularly published every year not only in speciality journals, but also in journals of other disciplines. Citation studies are nowadays considered a major basis of science indicators for ascertaining the importance of a scientific journal and that of the published articles on a particular subject. In oncological research the journalCancer is considered as one of the top most journals and is universally well known for its high standard and excellence. In this paper an attempt has been made to find out the importance of all the articles published in it for a particular year. Side by side bibliometric analysis was made to ascertain various other aspects like time lag between publication and first citation of articles, average citation time, subject scattering and identification of most important journals in the field etc. It is believed that this study would be of help to the working oncologists, librarians and information scientists to assess the importance of articles published in a top ranking journal of cancer and also that of different journals publishing oncological research results.     

Fish science research in China: How does it compare with fish research in India?

Fish and aquaculture research in the People's Republic of China over the six years 1994-1999 has been mapped using data from six databases– three abstracting services and three citation indexes. The results are compared with fish science research in India. During the six years China has published 2035 papers (roughly 4.5 –5% of the world output) and India 2454. More than 95% of China's papers are journal articles, compared to 82.8% of Indian papers. About 78% of China's journal paper output has appeared in 143 domestic journals compared to 70% from India in 113 Indian journals. Less than one-eighth of the journal articles published by Chinese researchers are published in journals indexed in SCI, compared to 30% of journal articles by Indian researchers. Less than a dozen papers from each of these countries have appeared in journals of impact factor greater than 3.0. Fish research institutes and fishery colleges are the major contributors of the Chinese research output in this area. In India academic institutions are the leading contributors (61%), followed by central government institutions (>25%). Qingdao, Wuhan, Beijing and Shanghai are the cities and Shandong, Hubei and Fujian are the provinces contributing a large number of papers. As we do not have addresses of all authors in most of the papers, we are unable to estimate the extent of international collaboration. Although China's research output and its citation impact are less than those of India, China's fish production and export earnings are far higher than those of India. Probably China is better at bridging the gap between knowhow (research) and do-how (technology and creation of employment and wealth). China is pretty strong in extension. This revised version was published online in June 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Journal self-citations that contribute to the impact factor: Documents labeled “editorial material” in journals covered by the Science Citation Index

Summary We investigated the distribution of citations included in documents labeled by the ISI as “editorial material” and how they contribute to the impact factor of journals in which the citing items were published. We studied all documents classified by the ISI as “editorial material” in the Science Citation Index between 1999 and 2004 (277,231 records corresponding to editorial material published in 6141 journals). The results show that most journals published only a few documents that included 1 or 2 citations that contributed to the impact factor, although a few journals published many such documents. The data suggest that manipulation of the impact factor by publishing large amounts of editorial material with many citations to the journal itself is not a widely used strategy to increase the impact factor.     

Citation patterns of Korean physicists and mechanical engineers: Differences by type of publication source and type of authorship

By comparing the citation patterns of Korean researchers in physics and mechanical engineering, this study identifies the extent to which type of publication source (Korean non-SCI, Korean SCI, and international SCI) and type of authorship (purely Korean authors, Korean-foreign co-authors, and foreign-Korean co-authors) influence the choice of sources cited by Korean scientists. Koreans publishing physics or mechanical engineering papers in international SCI journals are more likely to cite articles published in journals of the science mainstream countries (the U.S., the U.K., the Netherlands, and Germany) than articles published in national journals, while Koreans publishing in Korean journals tend to cite articles published in national journals. In terms of authorship, articles published in mainstream journals are more highly cited by internationally co-authored papers than Korean-authored papers in both disciplines. This revised version was published online in June 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.