Advertisement

Scientometrics

, Volume 88, Issue 1, pp 339–342 | Cite as

Anne-Wil Harzing: The publish or perish book: Your guide to effective and responsible citation analysis

Tarma Software Research Pty Ltd, Melbourne, Australia, c2010, ISBN 978-0-9808485-1-9, US$49.95 (paperback, black and white), US$74.95 (paperback, color)
  • Stephen J. Bensman
Article

Keywords

Citation Analysis Scientometric Indicator Institutional Entrepreneur Academic Evaluation Journal Review Article 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Adler, N. J., & Harzing, A.-W. (2009). When knowledge wins: Transcending the sense and nonsense of academic ranking. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 8(1), 72–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bar-Ilan, J. (2008). Which h-index—A comparison of WoS, scopus and google scholar. Scientometrics, 74(2), 257–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bensman, S. J. (2007a). Garfield and the impact factor. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 41, 93–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bensman, S.J. (2007b). Garfield and the Impact Factor: The creation, utilization, and validation of a citation measure: Part 2, The probabilistic, statistical, and sociological bases of the measure. Baton Rouge: Unpublished. Available on the Web site of Dr. Eugene Garfield at the following URL: http://garfield.library.upenn.edu/bensman/bensmanegif22007.pdf. Accessed 28 March 2011.
  5. Bensman, S. J. (2008). Distributional differences of the impact factor in the sciences versus the social sciences: An analysis of the probabilistic structure of the 2005 journal citation reports. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(6), 1097–1117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bensman, S. J., Smolinsky, L. J., & Pudovkin, A. I. (2010). Mean citation rate per article in mathematics journals: Differences from the scientific model. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(7), 1440–1463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Burright, M. (2006). Google scholar—science and technology. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, Winter, 1–4.Google Scholar
  8. Dixon, L., et al. (2010). Finding articles and journals via Google Scholar, journal portals, and link resolvers: Usability study results. Reference and User Services Quarterly, 50(2), 170–181.Google Scholar
  9. Harzing, A.-W., & van der Wal, R. (2008). Google Scholar as a new source for citation analysis. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 8, 61–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jacsó, P. (2009a). Calculating the h-index and other bibliometric and scientometric indicators with the Publish or Perish software. Online Information Review, 33(6), 1468–4527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jacsó, P. (2009b). Google Scholar’s ghost authors. Library Journal, 134(18), 26–27.Google Scholar
  12. London School of Economics and Political Science. (2011). Impact of the social sciences: Maximizing the impact of academic research. Available online at: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/. Accessed 28 March 2011.
  13. Meho, L. I., & Yang, K. (2007). Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of Science versus Scopus and Google Scholar. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(13), 2105–2125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. van Raan, T. (2010). Measure for measure. Nature, 468(7325), 763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LSU LibrariesLouisiana State UniversityBaton RougeUSA

Personalised recommendations