Sunday, May 31, 2009

B . H Index and Midlife Crisis of Impact

Williamson JR. My h-index Turns 40: My Midlife Crisis of Impact. ACS Chem Biol 2009, 4 (5:311–313.

The h-index, or Hirsch index, is a sort of personal impact factor, based on citations of published work. In this letter the author tells about his recent discover in the web of science on how to “Create Citation Report” through the “Author Finder”. Then he gies advise on how tho boost the H index.

Thanks to Enrico Alleva

Monday, May 18, 2009

B - Do We Need the h Index and Its Variants in Addition to Standard Bibliometric Measures?

L Bornmann, R Mutz, HD Daniel. Do We Need the h Index and Its Variants in Addition to Standard Bibliometric Measures? JASIS&T,2009 60(6):1286–1289

The study investigates whether there is a need for the h index and its variants in addition to standard bibliometric measures (SBMs). There are two types of indices: One type (e.g., h index) describes the most productive core of a scientist’s output and informs about the number of papers in the core.The other type (e.g., a index)
depicts the impact of the papers in the core. In evaluative bibliometric studies, the two dimensions quantity and quality of output are usually assessed using the SBMs “number of publications” (for the quantity dimension) and “total citation counts” (for the impact dimension). The Authors of the study additionally included the SBMs into the factor analysis. The results of the newly calculated analysis indicate that there is a high intercorrelation between “number of publications” and the indices that load substantially on the factor Quantity of the Productive Core as well as between “total citation counts” and the indices that load substantially on the factor Impact of the Productive Core. The authors propose the use of any pair of indicators (one relating to the number of papers in a researcher’s productive core and one relating to the impact of these core papers) as a meaningful approach for comparing scientists

Thanks to J. Hartley

Friday, May 15, 2009

B - The rise and fall of a physics fraudster

Reich, Eugenie Samuel. The rise and fall of a physics fraudster. Physics World 2009;22(5):24-29

Article based on the author's book: Plastic fantastic: how the biggest fraud in physics shook the scientific world (copyright 2009 by the author and edited and reprinted in Physics World by permission of Palgrave Macmillan). The author traces the history of Jan Hendrik Schön's career and what led him to fabricate data, how this affected the work of others who tried to replicate his results, and how eventually the fraud was detected.

Thanks to John Glen

Monday, May 11, 2009

B - The most influential journals: Impact Factor and Eigenfactor

Fersht A. PNAS 2009;106(17): 6883-6884.

To to rate the influence of journals a new bibliometric parameter, the Eigenfactor(, has recently been created and is now listed by Journal Citation Reports. The Eigenfactor ranks journals in a manner similar to that used by Google for ranking the importance of Web sites in a search. Practically, there is a strong correlation between Eigenfactors and the total number of citations received by a journal.
New and emerging measures of scientific impact are continuously developed and improved. However, the author wisely warns the scientists against relying solely on one standard measure. After all, science is about progress, which is ultimately assessed by human judgment.

Sunday, May 10, 2009

B - RCUK publishes report on open access study

RCUK . Report on open access study. May 2009

Research Councils in UK published an independent study regardng open access to research outputs. The purpose of the study was to identify the effects and impacts of open access on publishing models and institutional repositories in light of national and international trends. This included the impact of open access on the quality and efficiency of scholarly outputs, specifically journal articles. In response to the study, the Chief Executives of the Research Councils have agreed that over time the UK Research Councils will support increased open access, by:
building on their mandates on grant-holders to deposit research papers in suitable repositories within an agreed time period, and; extending their support for publishing in open access journals, including through the pay-to-publish model.

Friday, May 08, 2009

B - Citation violations

Gallagher R. Citation violations. The Scientist 2009;23(5):13.

The authors of scientific articles do not always cite properly previous research works. The “bibliographic negligence” or “citation amnesia”, as the improper citation or disregard of antecedent research is defined by Eugene Garfield, Editor Emeritus of The Scientist, is due to the fact that actually there is no best practice for citing prior work. Moreover, this behaviour is reinforced by the hard competition in the scientific environment that push the authors to omit mention of competitors results. A solution proposed is that journals should adopt a code of practice for citation. Many years ago Garfield suggested that authors declare and sign that they have done a minimal search of the literature and that to the best of their knowledge there is no other relevant work. However, the question still remains open…..;jsessionid=2C0154FB0FA68E846DA13D534A842CDE

Saturday, May 02, 2009

B - The extent of influence

Johnston R. The extent of influence: An alternative approach to identifying dominant contributors to a discipline’s literature. Scientometrics. 2009 (78)3: 409-420


Most studies of scholarly influence within disciplines using citation data do not investigate the extent of an individual’s influence. Using bibliographic data from a series of quadrennial reports into developments in UK geography, this paper finds that few authors are cited on more than one occasion.

Thanks to J. Hartley

B - Are multi-authorship and visibility related?

Iribarren-Maestro I, Lascurain-Sánchez ML, Sanz-Casado E Are multi-authorship and visibility related? Study of ten research areas at Carlos III University of Madrid. Scientometrics 2009 (79)1: 191-200

DOI 10.1007/s11192-009-0412-4

Opinions in the literature on the possible relationship between co-authorship and number of citations vary. The results of this study show that while multi-institutional and multi-national authorship raise the number of citations, co-authorship and number of citations are unrelated. Correspondence analysis failed to show any correlation between the quartile of the citing journal and multi-institutional or multinational authorship, but did reveal a relationship between citing journal quartile and departmental area.

Thanks to J. Harthley