Advertisement

Scientometrics

, Volume 35, Issue 2, pp 177–191 | Cite as

Differences in the construction of sci based bibliometric indicators among various producers: A first over view

  • H. F. Moed
Article

Abstract

This contribution discusses basic technical-methodological issues with respect to data collection and the construction of bibliometric indicators, particularly at the macro or meso level. It focusses on the use of the Science Citation Index. Its aim is to highlight important decisions that have to be made in the process of data collection and the construction of bibliometric indicators. It illustrates differences in the methodologies applied by several important producers of bibliometric indicators: the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI); CHI Research, Inc.; the Information Science and Scientometrics Research Unit (ISSRU) at Budapest; and the Centre for Science and Technology Studies at Leiden University (CWTS). The observations made in this paper illustrate the complexity of the process of ‘standardisation’ of bibliometric indicators. Moreover, they provide possible explanations for divergence of results obtained in different studies. The paper concludes with a few general comments related to the need of ‘standardisation’ in the field of bibliometrics.

Keywords

Data Collection Meso Scientific Information Research Unit Important Decision 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    D.J. de Solla, Price,Little Science, Big Science, New York, Columbia University Press, 1963.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    R.K. Merton, The institutional imperatives of science. In:B.S. Barnes (Ed.),The Sociology of Science, Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1972.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    E. Garfield,Citation Indexing — Its theory and Applications in Science, Technology and Humanities, New York, Wiley, 1979.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    B.R. Martin, J. Irvine, Assessing basic research. Some partial indicators of scientific progress in radio astronomy,Research Policy, 12 (1983) 61–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    H.F. Moed, R.E. de Bruin, A.J. Nederhof, A.F.J. van Raan, R.J.W. Tijssen,State of the Art Bibliometric Macro Indicators. An Overview of Demand and Supply, Research Report EUR 14582 EN. Luxembourg, Office for Official Publications of the European Community, 1992.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    See the issues of the journalScience Watch, published by the Institute for Scientific Information, Philadelpia.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    F. Narin,Evaluative Bibliometrics. The Use of Publication and Citation Data in the Evaluation of Scientific Activity, Washington DC, National Science Foundation, 1976.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    T. Braun, W. Glänzel, A. Schubert,Scientometric Indicators. A 32 Country Comparison of Publication Productivity and Citation Impact, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., Singapore, Philadelphia, 1985.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    A. Schubert, W. Glänzel, T. Braun, Scientometric datafiles. A comprehensive set of indicators on 2649 journals and 96 countries in all major science fields and subfields 1981–1985,Scientometrics, 16 (1989) 3–478.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    T. Braun, W. Glänzel, A. Schubert, Scientometric indicators datafiles,Scientometrics, 28 (1993) 137–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    A.F.J. Van Raan, Bibliometric indicators as research performance tools. In:K. Mesman Schultz, J.T.A. Koster, F.L. Leeuw, B.M.J. Wolters (Eds),Between Sociology and Sociological Practice. Essays on Social Policy Research, Liber Amicorum Dedicated to Mark van de Vall. Nijmegen (the Netherlands), Catholic University of Nijmegen, Institute for Applied Sciences, 1993, 136–158.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    H. Small, Relational Bibliometrics. In:M.E.D. Koenig, A. Bookstein (Eds),Proceedings of the Fifth Biennial Conference of the Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, River Forest IL, USA, June 7–10, 1995, 525–532.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    T. Braun, W. Glänzel, A. Schubert, Some data on the distribution of journal publication types in the Science Citation Database,Scientometrics, 15 (1989) 325–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    H.F. Moed, Th. N. van Leeuwen, Improving the accuracy of the Institute for Scientific Information's journal impact factor,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 46 (1995) 461–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    A. Schubert, W. Glänzel, T. Braun, Relative citation rate: A new indicator for measuring the impact of publications. In:D. Tomov, L. Dimitrova (Eds), Proceedings of the1st National Conference with International Participation on Scientometrics and Linguistic of the Scientific Text, Varna 1983, p. 80–81.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    H.F. Moed, R.E. de Bruin, Th. N. van Leeuwen, A bibliometric system for the assessment of national research performance. Database construction, overview of indicators and first applications,Scientometrics, 33 (1995) 381–422.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    A. Schubert, T. Braun, Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact,Scientometrics, 9 (1986) 281–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    W. Glänzel, A. Schubert, Characteristic scores and scales in assessing citation impact,Journal of Informetric Science, 14 (1988) 123–127.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    A. Schubert, W. Glänzel, T. Braun, Subject field characteristic citation scores and scales for assessing research performance,Scientometrics, 12 (1987) 267–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    J.S. Katz, D. Hicks, The classification of interdisciplinary journals: A new approach. In:op. cit Scientometrics, 12, 1995, p. 245–254.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    M. Bordons, F. Garcia Jover, S. Barrigon, Bibliometric analysis of publications of spanish pharmacologists in the SCI (1984–89). I. Contribution to the pharmacology and pharmacy subfield (ISI),Scientometrics, 24 (1992) 163–177.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    R.E. de Bruin, H.F. Moed, The unification of addresses in scientific publications. In:L. Egghe, R. Rousseau (Eds),Informetrics 89/90. Selection of papers submitted to the 2nd International conference on Bibliometrics, Scientometrics and Informetrics, London, Ontario, Canada, July 5–7, 1989. Amsterdam, Elsevier Science Publishers, 1990, p. 65–78.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    E. Guardiola, F. Bosch, J. Francesch, A. Cobos, J. Banos, Publications in pharmacology in the European Community; Their relationship with socio-economic indicators. In:op. cit. Scientometrics 12, 1995, p. 207–216.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. F. Moed
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Science and Technology StudiesLeiden UniversityLeiden(The Netherlands)

Personalised recommendations