, Volume 96, Issue 1, pp 51–67 | Cite as

Can a personal website be useful as an information source to assess individual scientists? The case of European highly cited researchers

  • Amalia Más-BledaEmail author
  • Isidro F. Aguillo


The web is not only the main scholarly communication tool but also an important source of additional information about the individual researchers, their scientific and academic activities and their formally and informally published results. The aim of this study is to investigate whether successful scientists use their personal websites to disseminate their work and career details and to know which specific contents are provided on those sites, in order to check if they could be used in research evaluation. The presence of the highly cited researchers working at European institutions were analysed, a group clearly biased towards senior male researchers working in large countries (United Kingdom and Germany). Results show that about two thirds of them have a personal website, specially the scientists from Denmark, Israel and the United Kingdom. The most frequent disciplines in those websites are economics, mathematics, computer sciences and space sciences, which probably reflect the success of open access subject repositories like RepEc, Arxiv or CiteSeerX. Other pieces of information analysed from the websites include personal and contact data, past experience and description of expertise, current activities and lists of the author’s scientific papers. Indicators derived from most of these items can be used for developing a portfolio with evaluation purposes, but the overall availability of them in the population analysed is not representative enough by now for achieving that objective. Reasons for that insufficient coverage and suggestions for improvement are discussed.


Highly cited researchers Personal website Europe Indicators Assessment 



This paper is supported by ACUMEN (Academic careers understood through Measurement and Norms) project, grant agreement number 266632, under the Seventh Framework Program of the European Union. Thanks are extended to Statistical Analysis Unit of the CCHS-CSIC (Spain) for its assistance and the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments.


  1. Aguillo, I. F., Ortega, J. L., & Fernández, M. (2008). Webometrics ranking of world universities: Introduction, methodology and future development. Higher Education in Europe, 33(2), 233–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aksnes, D. W., Rorstad, K., Piro, F., & Sivertsen, G. (2011). Age and scientific performance. A large-scale study of Norwegian scientists. In Proceedings of 13th ISSI Conference (pp. 34–45). Durban, South Africa: ISSI.Google Scholar
  3. Aksnes, D. W., Rorstad, K., Piro, F., & Sivertsen, G. (2011b). Are female researchers less cited? A large-scale study of Norwegian scientists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(4), 628–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. ALLEA—ALL European Academies. (2012). Open Science for the 21st century. A declaration of ALL European Academies, Rome. Accessed April 2012.
  5. Antelman, K. (2004). Do open-access articles have a greater research impact? College & Research Libraries, 65(5), 372–382.Google Scholar
  6. Antelman, K. (2006). Self-archiving practice and the influence of publisher policies in the social sciences. Learned Publishing, 19(2), 85–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bailey, C. W. (2010). Transforming scholarly publishing through open access: A bibliography. Houston: CreateSpace. Accessed May 2012.
  8. Barjak, F. (2006). The role of the Internet in informal scholarly communication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(10), 1350–1367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barjak, F., Li, X., & Thelwall, M. (2007). Which factors explain the web impact of scientists’ personal homepages? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(2), 200–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Basu, A. (2006). Using ISI’s ‘Highly Cited Researchers’ to obtain a country level indicator of citation excellence. Scientometrics, 68(3), 361–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Batty, M. (2003a). Citation geography: It’s about location. The Scientist, 17(16). Accessed April 2012.
  12. Batty, M. (2003b). The geography of scientific citation. Enrironment and Planning A, 35, 761–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Batty, L. M. (2009). Self-archiving of articles published in high-impact journals in the social sciences. A Master’s paper for the M.S. in L.S. degree. Accessed February 2012.
  14. Bergstrom, T., & Lavaty, R. (2007). How often do economists self-archive? Accessed February 2012.
  15. Bordons, M., Morillo, F., Fernández, M. T., & Gómez, I. (2003). One step further in the production of bibliometric indicators at the micro level: Differences by gender and professional category of scientists. Scientometrics, 57(2), 159–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chen, C., Sun, K., Wu, G., Tang, Q., Qin, J., Chiu, K., et al. (2009a). The impact of internet resources on scholarly communication: A citation analysis. Scientometrics, 81(2), 459–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Chen, C., Tang, Q., Huang, X., Wu, Z., Hua, H., Yu, Y., et al. (2009b). An assessment of the completeness of scholarly information on the internet. College & Research Libraries, 70(4), 386–401.Google Scholar
  18. Döring, N. (2002). Personal home pages on the web: A review of research. Journal of Computer-mediated Communication, 7(3). Accessed July 2011.
  19. Dumont, K., & Frindte, W. (2005). Content analysis of the homepages of academic psychologists. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(1), 73–83. Accessed July 2011.
  20. Fernández, M., Zamora, H., Ortega, J. L., Utrilla, A. M., & Aguillo, I. F. (2009). Género y visibilidad web de la actividad de profesores universitarios españoles: el caso de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid. Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 32(2), 51–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2003). The perceived credibility of personal web page information as influenced by the sex of the source. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(6), 683–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Frandsen, T. F. (2009a). The effects of open access on un-published documents: A case study of economics working papers. Journal of Informetrics, 3(2), 124–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Frandsen, T. F. (2009b). The integration of open access journals in the scholarly communication system: Three science fields. Information Processing and Management, 45(1), 131–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Herring, S. D. (2002). Use of Electronic Resources in Scholarly Electronic Journals: A Citation Analysis. College & Research Libraries, 63(4), 334–340.Google Scholar
  25. Hess, M. (2002). A Nomad faculty: English professors negotiate self-representation in university web space. Computer and Composition, 19, 171–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hyland, K. (2011). The presentation of self in scholarly life: Identity and marginalization in academic homepages. English for Specific Purposes, 30(4), 286–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kousha, K. (2009). Characteristics of open access scholarly publishing. Aslib Proceeding, 61(4), 394–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kousha, K., & Thelwall, M. (2006). Motivations for URL citations to open access library and information science articles. Scientometrics, 68(3), 501–517, Accessed March 2012.
  29. Kousha, K., & Thelwall, M. (2007). The web impact of open access social science research. Library & Information Science Research, 29, 495–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kousha, K., & Thelwall, M. (2008). Assessing the Impact of disciplinary Research on Teaching: An automatic analysis of online syllabuses. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(13), 2060–2069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kousha, K., Thelwall, M., & Rezaie, S. (2010). Using the web for research evaluation: The integrated online impact indicator. Journal of Informetrics, 4(1), 124–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kretschmer, H., Pudovkin, A., & Stegmann, J. (2012). Research evaluation. Part II: Gender effects of evaluation: Are men more productive and more cited than women? Scientometrics. doi: 10.1007/s11192-012-0658-0. Accessed March 2012.
  33. Kurtz, M. J. (2004). Restrictive access policies cut readership of electronic research journal articles by factor of two. Accessed November 2011.
  34. Lawrence, S. (2001a). Free online availability substantially increases a paper’s impact. Nature, 411, 521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lawrence, S. (2001b). Online or invisible? Nature, 411(6837), 521. Accessed August 2011.
  36. Davis, M. P. Lewenstein, B. V., Simon, D. H., & Connolly, M. J. L. (2008). Open access publishing, article downloads, and citations: Randomised controlled trial. British Medical Journal, 337. Accessed March 2012.
  37. Marcus, B., Machilek, F., & Schütz, A. (2006). Personality in cyberspace: Personal web sites as media for personality expressions and impressions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(6), 1014–1031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mauleón, E., & Bordons, M. (2006). Productivity, impact and publication habits by gender in the area of Material Science. Scientometrics, 66(1), 199–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Papacharissi, Z. (2002a). The presentation of self in virtual life: Characteristics of personal home pages. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 79(3), 643–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Papacharissi, Z. (2002b). The Self Online: The Utility of Personal Home Pages. Journal of Broadcasting Electronic Media, 46(3), 346–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Parks, M., & Archley-Landas, T. (2003). Communicating self through personal homepages: Is identity more than screen deep? Paper presented at the annual conference of the International Communication Association, San Diego, CA. Accessed September 2011.
  42. Petric, G. (2006). Conceptualizing and measuring the social uses of the Internet: The case of personal web sites. Information Society, 22(5), 291–301.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pitzek, S. (2002) Impact of online-availability of science literature. Accessed July 2011.
  44. Prpic, K. (2002). Gender and productivity differentials in science. Scientometrics, 55(1), 27–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pudovkin, A., Kretschmer, H., Stegmann, G. (2012). Research evaluation. Part I: Productivity and citedness of a German medical research institution. Scientometrics. doi: 10.1007/s11192-012-0659-z.
  46. Sánchez Peñas, C., & Willett, P. (2006). Brief communication Gender differences in publication and citation counts in librarianship and information science research. Journal of Information Science, 32(5), 480–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schmitt, K., Dayanim, S., & Matthias, S. (2008). Personal homepage construction as an expression of social development. Developmental Psychology, 44(2), 496–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Shin, E. J. (2003). Do impact factors change with a change of medium? A comparison of impact factors when publication is by paper and through parallel publishing. Journal of Information Science, 29(6), 527–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Swan, A. (2007). Open Access and the Progress of Science. American Scientist, 95, 198–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Swan, A. (2010). The open access citation advantage. Studies and results to date. Technical Report, School of Electronics & Computer Science, University of Southampton. Accessed March 2012.
  51. Thelwall, M., & Harries, G. (2004). Do the web sites of higher rated scholars have significantly more online impact? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 55(2), 149–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Thelwall, M., Kousha, & Kayvan, M. (2008). Online presentations as a Source of Scientific Impact? An analysis of PowerPoint files citing academic journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(5), 805–815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Thoms, L., & Thelwall, M. (2005). Academic home pages: Reconstruction of the self. First Monday, 10(12), Accessed August 2011.
  54. Torres-Salinas, D., Muñoz-Muñoz, A. M., & Jiménez-Contreras, E. (2011). Análisis bibliométrico de la situación de las mujeres investigadoras de Ciencias Sociales y Jurídicas en España. Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 34(1), 11–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Vaughan, L., & Thelwall, M. (2003). Scholarly use of the web: What are the key inducers of links to journal web sites? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(1), 29–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Vazire, S., & Gosling, S. D. (2004). E-perceptions: Personality impressions based on personal web sites. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(1), 123–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Weibel, D., Wissmath, B., & Groner, R. (2010). Motives for Creating a Private Website and Personality of Personal Homepage Owners in Terms of Extraversion and Heuristic Orientation. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 4(1).Google Scholar
  58. Zinkhan, G. M., Conchar, M., Gupta, A., & Geissler, G. (1999). Motivations underlying the creation of personal web pages. Advances in Consumer Research, 26, 69–74.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Cybermetrics Lab, Institute of Public Goods and Policies (IPP)Spanish National Research Council CSICMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations