-
Mutz, R.; Bornmann, L.; Daniel, H.-D.: Testing for the fairness and predictive validity of research funding decisions : a multilevel multiple imputation for missing data approach using ex-ante and ex-post peer evaluation data from the Austrian science fund (2015)
0.00
0.0032074254 = product of:
0.04811138 = sum of:
0.0472338 = weight(_text_:post in 2270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0472338 = score(doc=2270,freq=4.0), product of:
0.10409636 = queryWeight, product of:
5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.45375073 = fieldWeight in 2270, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2270)
8.775785E-4 = product of:
0.0026327355 = sum of:
0.0026327355 = weight(_text_:a in 2270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0026327355 = score(doc=2270,freq=8.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 2270, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2270)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
- Abstract
- It is essential for research funding organizations to ensure both the validity and fairness of the grant approval procedure. The ex-ante peer evaluation (EXANTE) of N?=?8,496 grant applications submitted to the Austrian Science Fund from 1999 to 2009 was statistically analyzed. For 1,689 funded research projects an ex-post peer evaluation (EXPOST) was also available; for the rest of the grant applications a multilevel missing data imputation approach was used to consider verification bias for the first time in peer-review research. Without imputation, the predictive validity of EXANTE was low (r?=?.26) but underestimated due to verification bias, and with imputation it was r?=?.49. That is, the decision-making procedure is capable of selecting the best research proposals for funding. In the EXANTE there were several potential biases (e.g., gender). With respect to the EXPOST there was only one real bias (discipline-specific and year-specific differential prediction). The novelty of this contribution is, first, the combining of theoretical concepts of validity and fairness with a missing data imputation approach to correct for verification bias and, second, multilevel modeling to test peer review-based funding decisions for both validity and fairness in terms of potential and real biases.
- Type
- a
-
Bornmann, L.: On the function of university rankings (2014)
0.00
0.0024274043 = product of:
0.036411062 = sum of:
0.014702087 = product of:
0.029404175 = sum of:
0.029404175 = weight(_text_:29 in 1188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029404175 = score(doc=1188,freq=2.0), product of:
0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.46638384 = fieldWeight in 1188, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1188)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.021708973 = product of:
0.03256346 = sum of:
0.003159283 = weight(_text_:a in 1188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.003159283 = score(doc=1188,freq=2.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 1188, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1188)
0.029404175 = weight(_text_:29 in 1188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029404175 = score(doc=1188,freq=2.0), product of:
0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.46638384 = fieldWeight in 1188, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1188)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
- Date
- 29. 1.2014 16:55:03
- Type
- a
-
Bornmann, L.; Marx, W.: Distributions instead of single numbers : percentiles and beam plots for the assessment of single researchers (2014)
0.00
0.0014499128 = product of:
0.02174869 = sum of:
0.008576217 = product of:
0.017152434 = sum of:
0.017152434 = weight(_text_:29 in 1190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017152434 = score(doc=1190,freq=2.0), product of:
0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 1190, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1190)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.013172473 = product of:
0.019758709 = sum of:
0.0026062755 = weight(_text_:a in 1190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0026062755 = score(doc=1190,freq=4.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 1190, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1190)
0.017152434 = weight(_text_:29 in 1190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017152434 = score(doc=1190,freq=2.0), product of:
0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 1190, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1190)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
- Abstract
- Citations measure an aspect of scientific quality: the impact of publications (A.F.J. van Raan, 1996). Percentiles normalize the impact of papers with respect to their publication year and field without using the arithmetic average. They are suitable for visualizing the performance of a single scientist. Beam plots make it possible to present the distributions of percentiles in the different publication years combined with the medians from these percentiles within each year and across all years.
- Date
- 29. 1.2014 15:58:21
- Type
- a
-
Bornmann, L.; Schier, H.; Marx, W.; Daniel, H.-D.: Is interactive open access publishing able to identify high-impact submissions? : a study on the predictive validity of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics by using percentile rank classes (2011)
0.00
0.0010837349 = product of:
0.016256023 = sum of:
0.00612587 = product of:
0.01225174 = sum of:
0.01225174 = weight(_text_:29 in 4132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01225174 = score(doc=4132,freq=2.0), product of:
0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 4132, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4132)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.010130152 = product of:
0.015195228 = sum of:
0.002943488 = weight(_text_:a in 4132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.002943488 = score(doc=4132,freq=10.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 4132, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4132)
0.01225174 = weight(_text_:29 in 4132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01225174 = score(doc=4132,freq=2.0), product of:
0.063047156 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 4132, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4132)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
- Abstract
- In a comprehensive research project, we investigated the predictive validity of selection decisions and reviewers' ratings at the open access journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP). ACP is a high-impact journal publishing papers on the Earth's atmosphere and the underlying chemical and physical processes. Scientific journals have to deal with the following question concerning the predictive validity: Are in fact the "best" scientific works selected from the manuscripts submitted? In this study we examined whether selecting the "best" manuscripts means selecting papers that after publication show top citation performance as compared to other papers in this research area. First, we appraised the citation impact of later published manuscripts based on the percentile citedness rank classes of the population distribution (scaling in a specific subfield). Second, we analyzed the association between the decisions (n = 677 accepted or rejected, but published elsewhere manuscripts) or ratings (reviewers' ratings for n = 315 manuscripts), respectively, and the citation impact classes of the manuscripts. The results confirm the predictive validity of the ACP peer review system.
- Date
- 8. 1.2011 18:29:40
- Type
- a
-
Leydesdorff, L.; Bornmann, L.: How fractional counting of citations affects the impact factor : normalization in terms of differences in citation potentials among fields of science (2011)
0.00
9.7442954E-4 = product of:
0.014616442 = sum of:
0.0045597646 = product of:
0.009119529 = sum of:
0.009119529 = weight(_text_:online in 4186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009119529 = score(doc=4186,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05439423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.16765618 = fieldWeight in 4186, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4186)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.010056677 = product of:
0.015085015 = sum of:
0.002943488 = weight(_text_:a in 4186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.002943488 = score(doc=4186,freq=10.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 4186, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4186)
0.012141528 = weight(_text_:22 in 4186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012141528 = score(doc=4186,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06276294 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4186, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4186)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
- Abstract
- The Impact Factors (IFs) of the Institute for Scientific Information suffer from a number of drawbacks, among them the statistics-Why should one use the mean and not the median?-and the incomparability among fields of science because of systematic differences in citation behavior among fields. Can these drawbacks be counteracted by fractionally counting citation weights instead of using whole numbers in the numerators? (a) Fractional citation counts are normalized in terms of the citing sources and thus would take into account differences in citation behavior among fields of science. (b) Differences in the resulting distributions can be tested statistically for their significance at different levels of aggregation. (c) Fractional counting can be generalized to any document set including journals or groups of journals, and thus the significance of differences among both small and large sets can be tested. A list of fractionally counted IFs for 2008 is available online at http:www.leydesdorff.net/weighted_if/weighted_if.xls The between-group variance among the 13 fields of science identified in the U.S. Science and Engineering Indicators is no longer statistically significant after this normalization. Although citation behavior differs largely between disciplines, the reflection of these differences in fractionally counted citation distributions can not be used as a reliable instrument for the classification.
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 12:51:07
- Type
- a
-
Marx, W.; Bornmann, L.: On the problems of dealing with bibliometric data (2014)
0.00
7.177545E-4 = product of:
0.021532632 = sum of:
0.021532632 = product of:
0.03229895 = sum of:
0.003159283 = weight(_text_:a in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.003159283 = score(doc=1239,freq=2.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 1239, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1239)
0.029139664 = weight(_text_:22 in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029139664 = score(doc=1239,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06276294 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 1239, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1239)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Date
- 18. 3.2014 19:13:22
- Type
- a
-
Bornmann, L.; Mutz, R.: From P100 to P100' : a new citation-rank approach (2014)
0.00
5.253072E-4 = product of:
0.015759215 = sum of:
0.015759215 = product of:
0.02363882 = sum of:
0.004212377 = weight(_text_:a in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004212377 = score(doc=1431,freq=8.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 1431, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1431)
0.019426443 = weight(_text_:22 in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019426443 = score(doc=1431,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06276294 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1431, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1431)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Abstract
- Properties of a percentile-based rating scale needed in bibliometrics are formulated. Based on these properties, P100 was recently introduced as a new citation-rank approach (Bornmann, Leydesdorff, & Wang, 2013). In this paper, we conceptualize P100 and propose an improvement which we call P100'. Advantages and disadvantages of citation-rank indicators are noted.
- Date
- 22. 8.2014 17:05:18
- Type
- a
-
Leydesdorff, L.; Bornmann, L.: Mapping (USPTO) patent data using overlays to Google Maps (2012)
0.00
4.2558162E-4 = product of:
0.006383724 = sum of:
0.0054717176 = product of:
0.010943435 = sum of:
0.010943435 = weight(_text_:online in 288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010943435 = score(doc=288,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05439423 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.20118743 = fieldWeight in 288, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=288)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
9.120064E-4 = product of:
0.0027360192 = sum of:
0.0027360192 = weight(_text_:a in 288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0027360192 = score(doc=288,freq=6.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 288, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=288)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
- Abstract
- A technique is developed using patent information available online (at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office) for the generation of Google Maps. The overlays indicate both the quantity and the quality of patents at the city level. This information is relevant for research questions in technology analysis, innovation studies, and evolutionary economics, as well as economic geography. The resulting maps can also be relevant for technological innovation policies and research and development management, because the U.S. market can be considered the leading market for patenting and patent competition. In addition to the maps, the routines provide quantitative data about the patents for statistical analysis. The cities on the map are colored according to the results of significance tests. The overlays are explored for the Netherlands as a "national system of innovations" and further elaborated in two cases of emerging technologies: ribonucleic acid interference (RNAi) and nanotechnology.
- Type
- a
-
Leydesdorff, L.; Bornmann, L.; Wagner, C.S.: ¬The relative influences of government funding and international collaboration on citation impact (2019)
0.00
4.0226712E-4 = product of:
0.012068013 = sum of:
0.012068013 = product of:
0.018102018 = sum of:
0.003532186 = weight(_text_:a in 4681) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.003532186 = score(doc=4681,freq=10.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 4681, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4681)
0.014569832 = weight(_text_:22 in 4681) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014569832 = score(doc=4681,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06276294 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4681, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4681)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Abstract
- A recent publication in Nature reports that public R&D funding is only weakly correlated with the citation impact of a nation's articles as measured by the field-weighted citation index (FWCI; defined by Scopus). On the basis of the supplementary data, we up-scaled the design using Web of Science data for the decade 2003-2013 and OECD funding data for the corresponding decade assuming a 2-year delay (2001-2011). Using negative binomial regression analysis, we found very small coefficients, but the effects of international collaboration are positive and statistically significant, whereas the effects of government funding are negative, an order of magnitude smaller, and statistically nonsignificant (in two of three analyses). In other words, international collaboration improves the impact of research articles, whereas more government funding tends to have a small adverse effect when comparing OECD countries.
- Date
- 8. 1.2019 18:22:45
- Type
- a
-
Bornmann, L.: How to analyze percentile citation impact data meaningfully in bibliometrics : the statistical analysis of distributions, percentile rank classes, and top-cited papers (2013)
0.00
3.5887724E-4 = product of:
0.010766316 = sum of:
0.010766316 = product of:
0.016149474 = sum of:
0.0015796415 = weight(_text_:a in 656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0015796415 = score(doc=656,freq=2.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 656, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=656)
0.014569832 = weight(_text_:22 in 656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014569832 = score(doc=656,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06276294 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 656, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=656)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Date
- 22. 3.2013 19:44:17
- Type
- a
-
Bornmann, L.; Marx, W.: ¬The wisdom of citing scientists (2014)
0.00
5.0157792E-5 = product of:
0.0015047337 = sum of:
0.0015047337 = product of:
0.004514201 = sum of:
0.004514201 = weight(_text_:a in 1293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004514201 = score(doc=1293,freq=12.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.21843673 = fieldWeight in 1293, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1293)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Abstract
- This Brief Communication discusses the benefits of citation analysis in research evaluation based on Galton's "Wisdom of Crowds" (1907). Citations are based on the assessment of many which is why they can be considered to have some credibility. However, we show that citations are incomplete assessments and that one cannot assume that a high number of citations correlates with a high level of usefulness. Only when one knows that a rarely cited paper has been widely read is it possible to say-strictly speaking-that it was obviously of little use for further research. Using a comparison with "like" data, we try to determine that cited reference analysis allows for a more meaningful analysis of bibliometric data than times-cited analysis.
- Type
- a
-
Bornmann, L.; Leydesdorff, L.: Statistical tests and research assessments : a comment on Schneider (2012) (2013)
0.00
4.9643342E-5 = product of:
0.0014893002 = sum of:
0.0014893002 = product of:
0.0044679004 = sum of:
0.0044679004 = weight(_text_:a in 752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0044679004 = score(doc=752,freq=4.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 752, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=752)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Type
- a
-
Bornmann, L.: Is there currently a scientific revolution in Scientometrics? (2014)
0.00
4.9643342E-5 = product of:
0.0014893002 = sum of:
0.0014893002 = product of:
0.0044679004 = sum of:
0.0044679004 = weight(_text_:a in 1206) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0044679004 = score(doc=1206,freq=4.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 1206, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1206)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Type
- a
-
Dobrota, M.; Bulajic, M.; Bornmann, L.; Jeremic, V.: ¬A new approach to the QS university ranking using the composite I-distance indicator : uncertainty and sensitivity analyses (2016)
0.00
4.9643342E-5 = product of:
0.0014893002 = sum of:
0.0014893002 = product of:
0.0044679004 = sum of:
0.0044679004 = weight(_text_:a in 2500) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0044679004 = score(doc=2500,freq=16.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 2500, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2500)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Abstract
- Some major concerns of universities are to provide quality in higher education and enhance global competitiveness, thus ensuring a high global rank and an excellent performance evaluation. This article examines the Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) World University Ranking methodology, pointing to a drawback of using subjective, possibly biased, weightings to build a composite indicator (QS scores). We propose an alternative approach to creating QS scores, which is referred to as the composite I-distance indicator (CIDI) methodology. The main contribution is the proposal of a composite indicator weights correction based on the CIDI methodology. It leads to the improved stability and reduced uncertainty of the QS ranking system. The CIDI methodology is also applicable to other university rankings by proposing a specific statistical approach to creating a composite indicator.
- Type
- a
-
Bornmann, L.: What do altmetrics counts mean? : a plea for content analyses (2016)
0.00
4.9643342E-5 = product of:
0.0014893002 = sum of:
0.0014893002 = product of:
0.0044679004 = sum of:
0.0044679004 = weight(_text_:a in 2858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0044679004 = score(doc=2858,freq=4.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 2858, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2858)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Type
- a
-
Bornmann, L.; Bauer, J.: Which of the world's institutions employ the most highly cited researchers : an analysis of the data from highlycited.com (2015)
0.00
4.6804194E-5 = product of:
0.0014041257 = sum of:
0.0014041257 = product of:
0.004212377 = sum of:
0.004212377 = weight(_text_:a in 1556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004212377 = score(doc=1556,freq=8.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 1556, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1556)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Abstract
- In 2014, Thomson Reuters published a list of the most highly cited researchers worldwide (highlycited.com). Because the data are freely available for downloading and include the names of the researchers' institutions, we produced a ranking of the institutions on the basis of the number of highly cited researchers per institution. This ranking is intended to be a helpful amendment of other available institutional rankings.
- Type
- a
-
Bornmann, L.; Bauer, J.: Which of the world's institutions employ the most highly cited researchers : an analysis of the data from highlycited.com (2015)
0.00
4.6804194E-5 = product of:
0.0014041257 = sum of:
0.0014041257 = product of:
0.004212377 = sum of:
0.004212377 = weight(_text_:a in 2223) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004212377 = score(doc=2223,freq=8.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 2223, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2223)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Abstract
- In 2014, Thomson Reuters published a list of the most highly cited researchers worldwide (highlycited.com). Because the data are freely available for downloading and include the names of the researchers' institutions, we produced a ranking of the institutions on the basis of the number of highly cited researchers per institution. This ranking is intended to be a helpful amendment of other available institutional rankings.
- Type
- a
-
Bornmann, L.; Leydesdorff, L.: Which cities produce more excellent papers than can be expected? : a new mapping approach, using Google Maps, based on statistical significance testing (2011)
0.00
4.6437097E-5 = product of:
0.0013931128 = sum of:
0.0013931128 = product of:
0.0041793385 = sum of:
0.0041793385 = weight(_text_:a in 4767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0041793385 = score(doc=4767,freq=14.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.20223314 = fieldWeight in 4767, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4767)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Abstract
- The methods presented in this paper allow for a statistical analysis revealing centers of excellence around the world using programs that are freely available. Based on Web of Science data (a fee-based database), field-specific excellence can be identified in cities where highly cited papers were published more frequently than can be expected. Compared to the mapping approaches published hitherto, our approach is more analytically oriented by allowing the assessment of an observed number of excellent papers for a city against the expected number. Top performers in output are cities in which authors are located who publish a statistically significant higher number of highly cited papers than can be expected for these cities. As sample data for physics, chemistry, and psychology show, these cities do not necessarily have a high output of highly cited papers.
- Type
- a
-
Bornmann, L.; Daniel, H.-D.: What do we know about the h index? (2007)
0.00
4.578759E-5 = product of:
0.0013736277 = sum of:
0.0013736277 = product of:
0.004120883 = sum of:
0.004120883 = weight(_text_:a in 477) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004120883 = score(doc=477,freq=10.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 477, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=477)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Abstract
- Jorge Hirsch recently proposed the h index to quantify the research output of individual scientists. The new index has attracted a lot of attention in the scientific community. The claim that the h index in a single number provides a good representation of the scientific lifetime achievement of a scientist as well as the (supposed) simple calculation of the h index using common literature databases lead to the danger of improper use of the index. We describe the advantages and disadvantages of the h index and summarize the studies on the convergent validity of this index. We also introduce corrections and complements as well as single-number alternatives to the h index.
- Type
- a
-
Bornmann, L.; Daniel, H.-D.: Universality of citation distributions : a validation of Radicchi et al.'s relative indicator cf = c/c0 at the micro level using data from chemistry (2009)
0.00
4.3878932E-5 = product of:
0.0013163679 = sum of:
0.0013163679 = product of:
0.0039491034 = sum of:
0.0039491034 = weight(_text_:a in 2954) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0039491034 = score(doc=2954,freq=18.0), product of:
0.020665944 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.017922899 = queryNorm
0.19109234 = fieldWeight in 2954, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2954)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Abstract
- In a recently published PNAS paper, Radicchi, Fortunato, and Castellano (2008) propose the relative indicator cf as an unbiased indicator for citation performance across disciplines (fields, subject areas). To calculate cf, the citation rate for a single paper is divided by the average number of citations for all papers in the discipline in which the single paper has been categorized. cf values are said to lead to a universality of discipline-specific citation distributions. Using a comprehensive dataset of an evaluation study on Angewandte Chemie International Edition (AC-IE), we tested the advantage of using this indicator in practical application at the micro level, as compared with (1) simple citation rates, and (2) z-scores, which have been used in psychological testing for many years for normalization of test scores. To calculate z-scores, the mean number of citations of the papers within a discipline is subtracted from the citation rate of a single paper, and the difference is then divided by the citations' standard deviation for a discipline. Our results indicate that z-scores are better suited than cf values to produce universality of discipline-specific citation distributions.
- Type
- a
