An examination of citation counts in a new scholarly communication environment

D-Lib Magazine

Volumn 11, Issue 9, 2005, Pages

  Bauer, Kathleen ^a   Bakkalbasi, Nisa ^a  

^a YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 25144437863     PISSN: 10829873     EISSN: 10829873     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1045/september2005-bauer     Document Type: Review

References (17)

1. Abt, H. A. (2004). A comparison of the citation counts in the Science Citation Index and the NASA Astronomical Data System. In A. Heck (Ed.), Organizations and Strategies in Astronomy (Vol. 6). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
2. Borgman, C. L., & Furner, J. (2002). Scholarly communication and bibliometrics. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 36, 3-72.
3. Bradford, S. C. (1953). Documentation (2nd ed.). London,: C. Lockwood.
4. Debackere, K., & Glanzel, W. (2004). Using a bibliometric approach to support research policy making: The case of the Flemish BOF-key. Scientometrics, 59(2), 253-276, 〈doi:10.1023/B%3ASCIE.0000018532.70146. 02〉.
5. Deis, L. F., & Goodman, D. (2005). Web of Science (2004 version) and Scopus. The Charleston Advisor, (5(3), 5-21. 〈http://www.charlestonco.com/ comp.cfm?id=43〉.
6. Eysenbach, G. (2000). The impact of preprint servers and electronic publishing on biomedical research. Current Opinion in Immunology, 12(5), 499-503. 〈doi:10.1016/S0952-7915(00)00127-8〉.
7. Fallows, D. (2005). Search engine users. Washington, D.C.: Pew Internet & American Life Project. 〈http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/ PIP_Searchengine_users.pdf〉.
8. Garfield, E. (1972). Citation Analysis as a Tool in Journal Evaluation. Science, 178(4060), 471-479.
9. Garson, L. R. (2004). Communicating original research in chemistry and related sciences. Accounts of Chemical Research, 37(3), 141-148. 〈doi:10.1021/ar0300017〉.
10. Jacso, P. (2004a, December). Google Scholar. Retrieved March 15, 2005, from 〈http://www.galegroup.com/reference/archive/200412/googlescholar. html〉.
11. Jacso, P. (2004b, September). Scopus. Retrieved March 15, 2005, from 〈http://www.galegroup.com/reference/archive/200409/scopus.html〉.
12. King, R. M., Geoffrey. (1999). Scholarly communication and the continuum of electronic publishing. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(10), 890-906.
13. LaGuardia, C. (2005). Scopus vs. Web of Science. Library Journal (1976), 130(1), 40, 42.
14. Presley, R. L., & Caraway, B. L. (1999). An Interview with Eugene Garfield. Serials Review, 25(3), 67-80.
15. Seglen, P. O. (1997). Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. BMJ, 314 (7079), 498-502. 〈http://bmj. bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/314/7079/497〉.
16. Vincent, A., & Ross, D. (2000). On Evaluation Of Faculty Research Impact Of Citation Analysis. Journal of Applied Business Research, 16(2), 1-15.
17. Walter, G., Bloch, S., Hunt, G., & Fisher, K. (2003). Counting on citations: a flawed way to measure quality. Medical Journal of Australia, 178(6), 280-281.