The unification of institutional addresses applying parametrized finite-state graphs (P-FSG)

We propose a semi-automatic method based on finite-state techniques for the unification of corporate source data, with potential applications for bibliometric purposes. Bibliographic and citation databases have a well-known problem of inconsistency in the data at micro-level and meso-level, affecting the quality of bibliometric searches and the evaluation of research performance. The unification method applies parametrized finite-state graphs (P-FSG) and involves three stages: (1) breaking of corporate source data in independent units of analysis; (2) creation of binary matrices; and (3) drawing finite-state graphs. This procedure was tested on university departmental addresses, downloaded from the ISI Web of Science. Evaluation was in terms of an adaptation of the measures of precision and recall. The results demonstrate the usefulness of this approach, though it requires some human processing.     

Influence of database mistakes on journal citation analysis: remarks on the paper by Franceschini and Maisano,QREI (2010)

This short note contains some remarks on a recent bibliometric survey about some of the major scientific journals in the field of Quality Engineering/Management (Qual. Reliab. Engng. Int. 2010; 26 (6):593–604). In particular, thanks to Professor Woodall's precious indication, it has been freshly noticed that some results in the original work are biased by mistakes in the bibliometric databases (in this case Google Scholar). After a careful examination and correction of biased data, a synthetic analysis of the typical mistakes of bibliometric databases is presented, focussing the attention on the importance of using robust bibliometric indicators. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Co-author inclusion: A novel recursive algorithmic method for dealingwith homonyms in bibliometric analysis

Summary Large scale bibliometric analysis is often hindered by the presence of homonyms, or namesakes, of the researchers of interest in literature databases. This makes it difficult to build up a true picture of a researcher's publication record, as publications by another researcher with the same name will be included in search results. Using additional information such as title and author addresses, an expert in the field can generally tell if a paper is by a researcher or a namesake; however, manual checking is not practical in large scale studies. Previously various methods have been used to address this problem, chiefly based on filtering by subject, funding acknowledgement or author address. Co-author inclusion is a novel algorithmic method based on co-authorship for dealing with problems of homonyms in large bibliometric surveys. We compared co-author inclusion and subject and funding based filter against the manual assignment of papers by a subject expert (which we assumed to be correct). The subject and funding based filtering identifies only 75% as many papers as assigned by manual scoring. By using co-author inclusion once we increase this to 95%, two further rounds produces 99% as many papers as manual filtering. Although the number of papers identified that were not assigned to the PIs manually also increases, the absolute number is low: rising from 0.2% papers with subject and funding filtering, to 3% papers for three rounds of co-author inclusion.     

Measuring China"s research performance using the Science Citation Index

This contribution focuses on the application of bibliometric techniques to research activities in China, based on data extracted from the Science Citation Index (SCI) and related Citation Indexes, produced by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI). The main conclusion is that bibliometric analyses based on the ISI databases in principle provide useful and valid indicators of the international position of Chinese research activities, provided that these analyses deal properly with the relatively large number of national Chinese journals covered by the ISI indexes. It is argued that it is important to distinguish between a national and an international point of view. In order to assess the Chinese research activities from a national perspective, it is appropriate to use the scientific literature databases with a good coverage of Chinese periodicals, such as the Chinese Science Citation Database (CSCD), produced at the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Assessment of the position of Chinese research from an international perspective should be based on the ISI databases, but it is suggested to exclude national Chinese journals from this analysis. In addition it is proposed to compute an indicator of international publication activity, defined as the percentage of articles in journals processed for the ISI indexes, with the national Chinese journals being removed, relative to the total number of articles published either in national Chinese or in other journals, regardless of whether these journals are processed for the ISI indexes or not. This indicator can only be calculated by properly combining CSCD and ISI indexes. This revised version was published online in June 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Coping with the problem of subject classification diversity

The delimitation of a research field in bibliometric studies presents the problem of the diversity of subject classifications used in the sources of input and output data. Classification of documents according to thematic codes or keywords is the most accurate method, mainly used in specialised bibliographic or patent databases. Classification of journals in disciplines presents lower specificity, and some shortcomings as the change over time of both journals and disciplines and the increasing interdisciplinarity of research. Differences in the criteria in which input and output data classifications are based obliges to aggregate data in order to match them. Standardization of subject classifications emerges as an important point in bibliometric studies in order to allow international comparisons, although flexibility is needed to meet the needs of local studies.     

Impact of bibliometrics upon the science system: Inadvertent consequences?

Summary Ranking of research institutions by bibliometric methods is an improper tool for research performance evaluation, even at the level of large institutions. The problem, however, is not the ranking as such. The indicators used for ranking are often not advanced enough, and this situation is part of the broader problem of the application of insufficiently developed bibliometric indicators used by persons who do not have clear competence and experience in the field of quantitative studies of science. After a brief overview of the basic elements of bibliometric analysis, I discuss the major technical and methodological problems in the application of publication and citation data in the context of evaluation. Then I contend that the core of the problem lies not necessarily at the side of the data producer. Quite often persons responsible for research performance evaluation, for instance scientists themselves in their role as head of institutions and departments, science administrators at the government level and other policy makers show an attitude that encourages 'quick and dirty' bibliometric analyses whereas better quality is available. Finally, the necessary conditions for a successful application of advanced bibliometric indicators as support tool for peer review are discussed.     

Systematic analysis of coverage and usage of conference proceedings in web of science

The role of conference proceedings for scientific communication varies among the different research fields. It is thus difficult to determine how to use them in bibliometric studies that cover all or at least a variety of the research fields without favouring or penalizing observation subjects that are specialized in fields that rely heavily on conference proceedings. Also, the coverage of conference proceedings in bibliometric databases is often unclear. Not only have there been reports of misclassification but also of insufficient coverage. In this study, the Web of Science is used to give an overview of coverage of conference proceedings as well as advantages and pitfalls of their usage in bibliometric analyses. In particular, the focus lies on different citation behaviour of and for conference proceedings and the implications for bibliometric indicators. This is complemented by an investigation of the development of coverage and publication behaviour in conference proceedings which is compared to those of journal publications. Finally, the importance but also drawbacks and opportunities of acknowledging conference proceedings publications for bibliometric studies are summarized.     

Is Google Scholar useful for bibliometrics? A webometric analysis

Google Scholar, the academic bibliographic database provided free-of-charge by the search engine giant Google, has been suggested as an alternative or complementary resource to the commercial citation databases like Web of Knowledge (ISI/Thomson) or Scopus (Elsevier). In order to check the usefulness of this database for bibliometric analysis, and especially research evaluation, a novel approach is introduced. Instead of names of authors or institutions, a webometric analysis of academic web domains is performed. The bibliographic records for 225 top level web domains (TLD), 19,240 university and 6,380 research centres institutional web domains have been collected from the Google Scholar database. About 63.8% of the records are hosted in generic domains like .com or .org, confirming that most of the Scholar data come from large commercial or non-profit sources. Considering only institutions with at least one record, one-third of the other items (10.6% from the global) are hosted by the 10,442 universities, while 3,901 research centres amount for an additional 7.9% from the total. The individual analysis show that universities from China, Brazil, Spain, Taiwan or Indonesia are far better ranked than expected. In some cases, large international or national databases, or repositories are responsible for the high numbers found. However, in many others, the local contents, including papers in low impact journals, popular scientific literature, and unpublished reports or teaching supporting materials are clearly overrepresented. Google Scholar lacks the quality control needed for its use as a bibliometric tool; the larger coverage it provides consists in some cases of items not comparable with those provided by other similar databases.     

Studying the brain drain: Can bibliometric methods help?

Today science policy makers in many countries worry about a brain drain, i.e., about permanently losing their best scientists to other countries. However, such a brain drain has proven to be difficult to measure. This article reports a test of bibliometric methods that could possibly be used to study the brain drain on the micro-level. An investigation of elite mobility must solve the three methodological problems of delineating a specialty, identifying a specialty's elite and identifying international mobility and migration. The first two problems were preliminarily solved by combining participant lists from elite conferences (Gordon conferences) and citation data. Mobility was measured by using the address information of publication databases. The delineation of specialties has been identified as the crucial problem in studying elite mobility on the micro- level. Policy concerns of a brain drain were confirmed by measuring the mobility of the biomedical Angiotensin specialty. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Research quality and diversity of funding: A model for relating research money to output of research

We analyze the relation between funding and output using bibliometric methods with field normalized data. Our approach is to connect individual researcher data on funding from Swedish university databases to data on incoming grants using the specific personal ID-number. Data on funding include the person responsible for the grant. All types of research income are considered in the analysis yielding a project database with a high level of precision. Results show that productivity can be explained by background variables, but that quality of research is more or less un-related to background variables.     

A comparison of Scopus and Web of Science for a typical university

For many years, the ISI Web of Knowledge from Thomson Reuters was the sole publication and citation database covering all areas of science thus becoming an invaluable tool in bibliometric analysis. In 2004, Elsevier introduced Scopus and this is rapidly becoming a good alternative. Several attempts have been made at comparing these two instruments from the point of view of journal coverage for research or for bibliometric assessment of research output.This paper attempts to answer the question that all researchers ask, i.e., what is to be gained by searching both databases? Or, if you are forced to opt for one of them, which should you prefer? To answer this question, a detailed paper by paper study is presented of the coverage achieved by ISI Web of Science and by Scopus of the output of a typical university. After considering the set of Portuguese universities, the detailed analysis is made for two of them for 2006, the two being chosen for their comprehensiveness typical of most European universities. The general conclusion is that about 2/3 of the documents referenced in any of the two databases may be found in both databases while a fringe of 1/3 are only referenced in one or the other. The citation impact of the documents in the core present in both databases is higher, but the impact of the fringe that are present only in one of the databases should not be disregarded as some high impact documents may be found among them.     

Correcting glasses help fair comparisons in international science landscape: Country indicators as a function of ISI database delineation

The increasing use of bibliometric indicators in science policy calls for a reassessment of their robustness and limits. The perimeter of journal inclusion within ISI databases will determine variations in the classic bibliometric indicators used for international comparison, such as world shares of publications or relative impacts. We show in this article that when this perimeter is adjusted using a natural criterion for inclusion of journals, the journal impact, the variation of the most common country indicators (publication and citation shares; relative impacts) with the perimeter chosen depends on two phenomena. The first one is a bibliometric regularity rooted in the main features of competition in the open space of science, that can be modeled by bibliometric laws, the parameters of which are “coverage-independent” indicators. But this regularity is obscured for many countries by a second phenomenon, the presence of a sub-population of journals that does not reflect the same international openness, the nationally-oriented journals. As a result indicators based on standard SCI or SCISearch perimeters are jeopardized to a certain extent by this sub-population which creates large irregularities. These irregularities often lead to an over-estimation of share and an under-estimation of the impact, for countries with national editorial tradition, while the impact of a few mainstream countries arguably benefits from the presence of this sub-population. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Advanced bibliometric methods as quantitative core of peer review based evaluation and foresight exercises

This paper gives an overview of the potentials and limitations of bibliometric methods for the assessment of strengths and weaknesses in research performance, and for monitoring scientific developments. We distinguish two different methods. In the first application, research performance assessment, the bibliometric method is based on advanced analysis of publication and citation data. We show that the resulting indicators are very useful, and in fact an indispensable element next to peer review in research evaluation procedures. Indicators based on advanced bibliometric methods offer much more than only numbers. They provide insight into the position of actors at the research front in terms of influence and specializations, as well as into patterns of scientific communication and processes of knowledge dissemination. After a discussion of technical and methodological problems, we present practical examples of the use of research performance indicators. In the second application, monitoring scientific developments, bibliometric methods based on advanced mapping techniques are essential. We discuss these techniques briefly and indicate their most important potentials, particularly their role in foresight exercises. Finally, we give a first outline of how both bibliometric approaches can be combined to a broader and powerful methodology to observe scientific advancement and the role of actors.     

Four decades of fuzzy sets theory in operations management: application of life-cycle,bibliometrics and content analysis

The blockchain is a technology which accumulates and compiles data into a chain of multiple blocks. Many blockchain researchers are adopting it in multiple areas. However, there are still lacks bibliometric reports exhibiting the exploration of an in-depth research pattern in blockchain. This paper aims to address that gap by analyzing the widespread of blockchain research activities conducted thus far. This study analyzed the Scopus database by using bibliometric analysis in a pool of more than 1000 articles that were published between 2013 and 2018. In particular, this paper discusses various aspects of blockchain research conducted by researchers globally. This study also focuses on the utilization of blockchain and its consensus algorithms. This bibliometric analysis discovered the following: (1) Blockchain able to solve security issues in internet of things (IoT) and would be an increasing trend in the future; (2) Researchers begin to adopt blockchain in healthcare area; (3) The most active country in blockchain publication is United States, followed by China and Germany; (4) Switzerland and Singapore are two small size countries that published few publications, however receives many citations. (5) Research collaborations between countries increased the research publications except for Canada, India, and Brazil. (6) Keyword analysis revealed that researchers are adopting blockchain to solve problems in multiple categories of the data research area (data privacy, digital storage, the security of data, big data, and distributed database). This study also highlighted the utilization and consensus of the algorithm in blockchain research.

     

Inspecting the Achilles heel: a quantitative analysis of 50 years of family business definitions

Despite numerous attempts by academics from many disciplines and various regional contexts, there is still no agreement on a definition of family business. Subjecting 258 definitions found in work published over the past 50 years (1964–2013) to the bibliometric techniques of consensus and co-word analysis to uncover intellectual structure, we identify the key terms used to underpin the concept of family business and to track the progress made towards consensus on its definition. We find an emergence of definitional key terms by which scholars attempt to clarify the concepts of family and family business, and growing agreement of what criteria should be met in framing a definition. This study contributes to the literature by offering a synthesis of what constitutes a family business, as well as a systematic and quantitative analysis of its evolution over a half century of research. It also shows how bibliometric tools can be used to shed light on fields where definitional ambiguity persists.     

An item-by-item subject classification of papers published in multidisciplinary and general journals using reference analysis

A serious shortcoming of bibliometric studies based on the(Social) Science (s) Citation Index is the lack of an universally applicable subject classification scheme as individual papers are concerned. Subject classification of papers on the basis of assigning journals to subject categories (like those found in the various supplements of ISI databases) works well in case of highly specialised journals, but fails for multidisciplinary journals such asNature, Science andPNAS—and so far as subfields are taken into consideration-also for “general” journals (e.g.JACS orAngewandte Chemie). This study presents the results of a pilot project attempting to overcome this shortcoming by delimiting the subject of papers published in multidisciplinary and general journals by an item-by-item subject classification scheme, where assignment is based on the analysis of the subject classification of reference literature. The results clearly confirmed the conclusions of earlier studies by the authors in the field of reference analysis. For the really important journals (sufficiently high number of annual publications and high impact with respect to the field), the share of classifiable papers was surprisingly high, and the assignment proved reliable as well. Since papers in the leading general and multidisciplinary journals are frequently citing general and multidisciplinary journals, an iterated application of the procedure is expected to increase the number of classifiable publications. The results of the new methodology may improve the validity of bibliometric studies for research evaluation purposes.     

Assessing multidisciplinary areas of science and technology: A synthetic bibliometric study of Dutch nuclear energy research

This paper presents a selection of results of a comprehensive quantitative, research literature-based study of Dutch energy research. The primary goal of this paper is to provide an overview of what bibliometric data from ISI and non-ISI databases may offer to describe the state of affairs in a scientific field. It illustrates the added value of combining bibliometric indicators of publication output, international visibility, international co-operation, and interdisciplinarity in a study of nuclear energy research in the 1980's when its budget decreased dramatically.