Zehra Taşkın, Franciszek Krawczyk, Emanuel Kulczycki
Abstract This study uses content-based citation analysis to move beyond the simplified classification of predatory journals. We present that, when we analyze papers not only in terms of the quantity of their citations but also the content of these citations, we are able to show the various roles played by papers published in journals accused of being predatory. To accomplish this, we analyzed the content of 9,995 citances (i.e., citation sentences) from 6,706 papers indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection, which cites papers published in so-called “predatory” (or questionable) journals. The analysis revealed that the vast majority of such citances are neutral (97.3%), and negative citations of articles published in the analyzed journals are almost completely nonexistent (0.8%). Moreover, the analysis revealed that the most frequently mentioned countries in the citances are India, Pakistan, and Iran, with mentions of Western countries being rare. This highlights a geopolitical bias and shows the usefulness of looking at such journals as mislocated centers of scholarly communication. The analyzed journals provide regional data prevalent for mainstream scholarly discussions, and the idea of predatory publishing hides geopolitical inequalities in global scholarly publishing. Our findings also contribute to the further development of content-based citation analysis.
{"title":"Are papers published in predatory journals worthless? A geopolitical dimension revealed by content-based analysis of citations","authors":"Zehra Taşkın, Franciszek Krawczyk, Emanuel Kulczycki","doi":"10.1162/qss_a_00242","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00242","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This study uses content-based citation analysis to move beyond the simplified classification of predatory journals. We present that, when we analyze papers not only in terms of the quantity of their citations but also the content of these citations, we are able to show the various roles played by papers published in journals accused of being predatory. To accomplish this, we analyzed the content of 9,995 citances (i.e., citation sentences) from 6,706 papers indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection, which cites papers published in so-called “predatory” (or questionable) journals. The analysis revealed that the vast majority of such citances are neutral (97.3%), and negative citations of articles published in the analyzed journals are almost completely nonexistent (0.8%). Moreover, the analysis revealed that the most frequently mentioned countries in the citances are India, Pakistan, and Iran, with mentions of Western countries being rare. This highlights a geopolitical bias and shows the usefulness of looking at such journals as mislocated centers of scholarly communication. The analyzed journals provide regional data prevalent for mainstream scholarly discussions, and the idea of predatory publishing hides geopolitical inequalities in global scholarly publishing. Our findings also contribute to the further development of content-based citation analysis.","PeriodicalId":34021,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Science Studies","volume":"4 1","pages":"44-67"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47435100","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract For a long time, citation counts have been used to measure scientific impact or quality. Do such measures align with researchers’ assessments of the quality of their work? In this study, we address this issue by decomposing the research quality concept into constituent parts and analyzing their correspondence with citation measures. The focus is on individual publications, their citation counts and how the publications are rated by the authors themselves along quality dimensions. Overall, the study shows a statistically significant relationship for all dimensions analyzed: solidity, novelty/originality, scientific importance and societal impact. The highest correlation is found for scientific importance. However, it is not very strong, but we find distinct gradients when publications are grouped by quality scores. This means that the higher the researchers rate their work, the more they are cited. The results suggest that citation metrics have low reliability as indicators at the level of individual articles, but at aggregated levels, the validity is higher, at least according to how authors perceive quality.
{"title":"Citation metrics covary with researchers’ assessments of the quality of their works","authors":"Dag W. Aksnes, F. Piro, Lone Wanderås Fossum","doi":"10.1162/qss_a_00241","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00241","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract For a long time, citation counts have been used to measure scientific impact or quality. Do such measures align with researchers’ assessments of the quality of their work? In this study, we address this issue by decomposing the research quality concept into constituent parts and analyzing their correspondence with citation measures. The focus is on individual publications, their citation counts and how the publications are rated by the authors themselves along quality dimensions. Overall, the study shows a statistically significant relationship for all dimensions analyzed: solidity, novelty/originality, scientific importance and societal impact. The highest correlation is found for scientific importance. However, it is not very strong, but we find distinct gradients when publications are grouped by quality scores. This means that the higher the researchers rate their work, the more they are cited. The results suggest that citation metrics have low reliability as indicators at the level of individual articles, but at aggregated levels, the validity is higher, at least according to how authors perceive quality.","PeriodicalId":34021,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Science Studies","volume":"4 1","pages":"105-126"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48011819","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Crossref is an official digital object identifier registration agency launched in 2000 as a joint effort between publishers to allow persistent cross-publisher citation linking in online academic journals. Our study explores the coverage of Crossref for tracking literature in the arts and humanities, which usually has a national or regional focus and targets domestic audiences. An analysis of the coverage of ERIH PLUS journals shows that Crossref indexes more sources than Scopus and includes additional journals from Eastern and Southern Europe and the Global South. Crossref limitations arise when analyzing the amount of metadata deposited by publishers. Just two-thirds of the journals deposit abstracts and ORCIDs and around a third deposit affiliations. The level of metadata completion for individual articles is lower, with major differences depending on the language of the document. Just half of the journals actually deposit references. As a result, Scopus retrieves more citations than Crossref, except for publications in German and French. Crossref represents a promising bibliographic discovery tool in the arts and humanities but is in need of improvement regarding the level of metadata completion.
{"title":"Crossref as a bibliographic discovery tool in the arts and humanities","authors":"Á. Borrego, Jordi Ardanuy, Llorenç Arguimbau","doi":"10.1162/qss_a_00240","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00240","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Crossref is an official digital object identifier registration agency launched in 2000 as a joint effort between publishers to allow persistent cross-publisher citation linking in online academic journals. Our study explores the coverage of Crossref for tracking literature in the arts and humanities, which usually has a national or regional focus and targets domestic audiences. An analysis of the coverage of ERIH PLUS journals shows that Crossref indexes more sources than Scopus and includes additional journals from Eastern and Southern Europe and the Global South. Crossref limitations arise when analyzing the amount of metadata deposited by publishers. Just two-thirds of the journals deposit abstracts and ORCIDs and around a third deposit affiliations. The level of metadata completion for individual articles is lower, with major differences depending on the language of the document. Just half of the journals actually deposit references. As a result, Scopus retrieves more citations than Crossref, except for publications in German and French. Crossref represents a promising bibliographic discovery tool in the arts and humanities but is in need of improvement regarding the level of metadata completion.","PeriodicalId":34021,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Science Studies","volume":"4 1","pages":"91-104"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42878206","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Academic mobility is an important factor that shapes academic institutions. Research performance is correlated with many factors, including the past research performance and gender of the academic. Understanding the factors behind academic mobility and research performance may provide a guide for a better higher education policy. In this paper, we analyze the mobility, publication, and research grant performance of all faculty members who taught in economics departments at Turkish public universities in 2010. Women, older faculty, and those who work in more established universities or in three major cities are less likely to move. The faculty members who have better past research performance, and who hold foreign PhDs, publish more. However, contrary to most of the literature, we do not find any gender productivity differentials. Last, we find that past publication performance is positively correlated with the number of current research grants, although past research grant performance does not have a significant correlation with the number of current publications.
{"title":"Predicting mobility and research performance of the faculty members in the economics departments at Turkish public universities","authors":"Tolga Yuret","doi":"10.1162/qss_a_00238","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00238","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Academic mobility is an important factor that shapes academic institutions. Research performance is correlated with many factors, including the past research performance and gender of the academic. Understanding the factors behind academic mobility and research performance may provide a guide for a better higher education policy. In this paper, we analyze the mobility, publication, and research grant performance of all faculty members who taught in economics departments at Turkish public universities in 2010. Women, older faculty, and those who work in more established universities or in three major cities are less likely to move. The faculty members who have better past research performance, and who hold foreign PhDs, publish more. However, contrary to most of the literature, we do not find any gender productivity differentials. Last, we find that past publication performance is positively correlated with the number of current research grants, although past research grant performance does not have a significant correlation with the number of current publications.","PeriodicalId":34021,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Science Studies","volume":"4 1","pages":"167-185"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47753170","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
M. Milia, C. González-Brambila, Ángel Lee, José Ignacio Ponce
Abstract Global research on medical and health-related issues has experienced a profound reconfiguration over the last 30 years. The rise of new areas of inquiry has transformed the medical research landscape as staff with medical training gradually relinquished their prominence and specialists from other disciplines raised their profile within research teams. Given this, research priorities seem to be shifting increasingly towards laboratory-based and innovation-oriented research lines. The unfolding of these shifts in nonhegemonic countries such as Mexico is still to be understood. This paper surveys structural changes in Mexican medical research from 1993 to 2021 by observing temporal aggregation of authorships, emerging thematic features, and institutional affiliation patterns. It also explores correlations between these findings and their possible explanations. The results allow us to empirically describe significant changes in medical research done in Mexico. We detected periods of stability in authorship allowing us to describe stages in the accumulation of research and development (R&D) capabilities. The identified semantic patterns allowed us to characterize this transformation, observing subsequent stages of an accumulation and specialization process that began in the mid-1990s. Moreover, we found divergent thematic and institutional patterns that point towards a growing gap between research conducted in health institutions and scientific ones.
{"title":"The transformation of medical research in Mexico: A structural analysis of thematic domains, institutional affiliations, authors’ cohorts, and possible correlations","authors":"M. Milia, C. González-Brambila, Ángel Lee, José Ignacio Ponce","doi":"10.1162/qss_a_00239","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00239","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Global research on medical and health-related issues has experienced a profound reconfiguration over the last 30 years. The rise of new areas of inquiry has transformed the medical research landscape as staff with medical training gradually relinquished their prominence and specialists from other disciplines raised their profile within research teams. Given this, research priorities seem to be shifting increasingly towards laboratory-based and innovation-oriented research lines. The unfolding of these shifts in nonhegemonic countries such as Mexico is still to be understood. This paper surveys structural changes in Mexican medical research from 1993 to 2021 by observing temporal aggregation of authorships, emerging thematic features, and institutional affiliation patterns. It also explores correlations between these findings and their possible explanations. The results allow us to empirically describe significant changes in medical research done in Mexico. We detected periods of stability in authorship allowing us to describe stages in the accumulation of research and development (R&D) capabilities. The identified semantic patterns allowed us to characterize this transformation, observing subsequent stages of an accumulation and specialization process that began in the mid-1990s. Moreover, we found divergent thematic and institutional patterns that point towards a growing gap between research conducted in health institutions and scientific ones.","PeriodicalId":34021,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Science Studies","volume":"4 1","pages":"262-282"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49531490","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Latin America is a cultural power composed of almost 40 countries, when the Caribbean is included, and with over 660 million inhabitants. In spite of political instability and severe cuts in investments in science and technology, the Latin American region shares sociocultural richness and an open access culture that aims to democratize knowledge, from non-profit publishers of public universities and scientific societies that work to strengthen regional science output. About 60% of the science output indexed in international databases is available in open access, much of it is diamond, which means that it doesn’t include any Article Processing Charge (APC) for authors. https://publons.com/publon/10.1162/qss_a_00235
{"title":"Interview with Dr. Fernanda Beigel: Latin America wants to strengthen regional science through new global open access configurations","authors":"Germana Barata","doi":"10.1162/qss_a_00235","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00235","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Latin America is a cultural power composed of almost 40 countries, when the Caribbean is included, and with over 660 million inhabitants. In spite of political instability and severe cuts in investments in science and technology, the Latin American region shares sociocultural richness and an open access culture that aims to democratize knowledge, from non-profit publishers of public universities and scientific societies that work to strengthen regional science output. About 60% of the science output indexed in international databases is available in open access, much of it is diamond, which means that it doesn’t include any Article Processing Charge (APC) for authors.\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 https://publons.com/publon/10.1162/qss_a_00235\u0000","PeriodicalId":34021,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Science Studies","volume":"4 1","pages":"306-313"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48181723","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Given the limitations of traditional scientometric indicators to recognize the diversity of circulating knowledge in different languages, formats and regions, the Research Center on the Circulation of Knowledge (CECIC-Argentina) has developed a set of research circulation analytical indicators, nucleated in the “Cuyo Manual.” This article presents the results of the first exploratory case study carried out, that of the Universidad Nacional de San Martín (UNSAM), showing how the institution and its researchers internationalize, regionalize or territorialize their scientific productions. In addition to the articles published in internationally oriented journals, under what other formats and in which directions does research production circulate? What are the capacities installed and actions deployed by the university in terms of research circulation? These and other questions are addressed in this paper, in order to show the diversity and multiscalarity of the scientific knowledge produced, which crosses not only international and national spaces but also the closest areas of influence to the institution itself.
{"title":"Indicators of research circulation: Localization and internationalization under scrutiny—The Cuyo Manual and its exploratory case study in Argentina","authors":"Víctor Algañaraz, Flavia Prado, M. P. Rossomando","doi":"10.1162/qss_a_00229","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00229","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Given the limitations of traditional scientometric indicators to recognize the diversity of circulating knowledge in different languages, formats and regions, the Research Center on the Circulation of Knowledge (CECIC-Argentina) has developed a set of research circulation analytical indicators, nucleated in the “Cuyo Manual.” This article presents the results of the first exploratory case study carried out, that of the Universidad Nacional de San Martín (UNSAM), showing how the institution and its researchers internationalize, regionalize or territorialize their scientific productions. In addition to the articles published in internationally oriented journals, under what other formats and in which directions does research production circulate? What are the capacities installed and actions deployed by the university in terms of research circulation? These and other questions are addressed in this paper, in order to show the diversity and multiscalarity of the scientific knowledge produced, which crosses not only international and national spaces but also the closest areas of influence to the institution itself.","PeriodicalId":34021,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Science Studies","volume":"4 1","pages":"283-305"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46330307","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Gabriel Vélez-Cuartas, Germana Barata, R. Costas, R. Mugnaini, Ismael Rafols
This special issue presents a small selection of contributions from Latmétricas 2021, among those submitted by authors. This Conference brought together more than 500 practitioners and researchers from every corner of Latin America and the Caribbean. There were sessions on new metrics, measuring open access effects on productivity and impact, the relationship between gender and scientific assessment, STI policies and assessment in regional governments, geohistoriometric indicators to evaluate the historical trajectories of scientific production, and assessment of infrastructure capacities. https://publons.com/publon/10.1162/qss_e_00234
{"title":"Latmétricas: Special issue on developments of S&T indicators in Latin America","authors":"Gabriel Vélez-Cuartas, Germana Barata, R. Costas, R. Mugnaini, Ismael Rafols","doi":"10.1162/qss_e_00234","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_e_00234","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This special issue presents a small selection of contributions from Latmétricas 2021, among those submitted by authors. This Conference brought together more than 500 practitioners and researchers from every corner of Latin America and the Caribbean. There were sessions on new metrics, measuring open access effects on productivity and impact, the relationship between gender and scientific assessment, STI policies and assessment in regional governments, geohistoriometric indicators to evaluate the historical trajectories of scientific production, and assessment of infrastructure capacities.\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 https://publons.com/publon/10.1162/qss_e_00234\u0000","PeriodicalId":34021,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Science Studies","volume":"4 1","pages":"229-232"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47587018","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This study is a critical review aimed at assessing the reception received in bibliometric research by the theories and concepts developed by the sociologist Pierre Bourdieu. The data set consists of 182 documents, including original articles, editorial material, review articles, conference papers, monographs, and doctoral dissertations. A quantitative analysis was used to establish the authors and countries that most frequently make use of Bourdieu’s theories, as well as the most popular concepts, which were identified as “field,” followed by “symbolic capital” and “social capital.” Then, the article discusses the impact of Bourdieusian key concepts such as “field.” Among the findings, the following are noteworthy: the integration of his field theory into pre-existing bibliometric conceptualizations of research fields, especially when power relations are problematized; the use of “symbolic capital” in connection with citation analysis and altmetrics; and greater interest in Bourdieu’s theories compared to his methods, although some sources have used Bourdieu’s preferred statistical method, correspondence analysis. Moreover, Bourdieu’s theoretical impact is noticeable in research on journals, university rankings, early career researchers, and gender. The paper’s conclusions point to future research paths based on concepts less used in the bibliometric literature, such as “delegation.”
{"title":"Field, capital, and habitus: The impact of Pierre Bourdieu on bibliometrics","authors":"M. Schirone","doi":"10.1162/qss_a_00232","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00232","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This study is a critical review aimed at assessing the reception received in bibliometric research by the theories and concepts developed by the sociologist Pierre Bourdieu. The data set consists of 182 documents, including original articles, editorial material, review articles, conference papers, monographs, and doctoral dissertations. A quantitative analysis was used to establish the authors and countries that most frequently make use of Bourdieu’s theories, as well as the most popular concepts, which were identified as “field,” followed by “symbolic capital” and “social capital.” Then, the article discusses the impact of Bourdieusian key concepts such as “field.” Among the findings, the following are noteworthy: the integration of his field theory into pre-existing bibliometric conceptualizations of research fields, especially when power relations are problematized; the use of “symbolic capital” in connection with citation analysis and altmetrics; and greater interest in Bourdieu’s theories compared to his methods, although some sources have used Bourdieu’s preferred statistical method, correspondence analysis. Moreover, Bourdieu’s theoretical impact is noticeable in research on journals, university rankings, early career researchers, and gender. The paper’s conclusions point to future research paths based on concepts less used in the bibliometric literature, such as “delegation.”","PeriodicalId":34021,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Science Studies","volume":"4 1","pages":"186-208"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49334764","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Google Scholar (GS) has aroused a good deal of interest among the bibliometric and scientometric community, owing to its capacity for gathering publication data, tracking citations, and creating metrics. This has led to reflections on its potential value as a means of enhancing evaluative procedures. However, despite being a useful tool because of its wide coverage, it has been monitored by specialists. For this reason, we aimed to map out the publications in the areas of Information Science & Library Science and/or Computer Science that make use of GS through a bibliometric review. Comprising data retrieved from the WoS and Dimensions, the results drew the attention of the bibliometric and scientometric community to the range of research problems in studies using GS. They also made it possible to identify the most prolific countries and authors and their preferred sources for publication. The presence of non-Anglophone countries and those from Latin America highlights the importance of alternative information sources to bibliometric and scientometric studies.
{"title":"Mapping the use of Google Scholar in evaluative bibliometric or scientometric studies: A bibliometric review","authors":"Fabiana Andrade Pereira, R. Mugnaini","doi":"10.1162/qss_a_00231","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00231","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Google Scholar (GS) has aroused a good deal of interest among the bibliometric and scientometric community, owing to its capacity for gathering publication data, tracking citations, and creating metrics. This has led to reflections on its potential value as a means of enhancing evaluative procedures. However, despite being a useful tool because of its wide coverage, it has been monitored by specialists. For this reason, we aimed to map out the publications in the areas of Information Science & Library Science and/or Computer Science that make use of GS through a bibliometric review. Comprising data retrieved from the WoS and Dimensions, the results drew the attention of the bibliometric and scientometric community to the range of research problems in studies using GS. They also made it possible to identify the most prolific countries and authors and their preferred sources for publication. The presence of non-Anglophone countries and those from Latin America highlights the importance of alternative information sources to bibliometric and scientometric studies.","PeriodicalId":34021,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Science Studies","volume":"4 1","pages":"233-245"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46152682","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：