Mapping the bid behavior of conference referees

Journal of Informetrics

Volumn 1, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 68-82

  Rodriguez, Marko A ^a   Bollen, Johan ^a   Van de Sompel, Herbert ^a  

^a LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

Bid behavior; Peer review; Referees

Indexed keywords

EID: 33846281147     PISSN: 17511577     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2006.09.006     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Baeza-Yates R.A., and Ribeiro-Neto B.A. Modern Information Retrieval (1999), ACM Press/Addison-Wesley
2. Bence V., and Oppenheim C. The influence of peer review on the research assessment exercise. Journal of Information Science 30 4 (2004) 347-368
3. Borgman C., and Furner J. Scholarly communication and bibliometrics. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 36 (2002) 3-72
4. Eisenhart M. The paradox of peer review: Admitting too much or allowing too little?. Research in Science Education 32 2 (2002) 241-255
5. El-Munchid H. Evaluation of peer review in biomedical publications. Annals of Saudi Medicine 21 (2001) 5-6
6. Evans P. The peer-review process. Literati Newsline: Special Issue for Authors and Editors (1995) 2
7. Hamming R.W. Error-detecting and error-correcting codes. Bell System Technical Journal 29 2 (1950) 147-160
8. Kassirer J.P., and Campion E.W. Peer review: Crude and understudied, but indispensable. The Journal of the American Medical Association 272 (1994) 96-97
9. Lance G., and Williams W. A general theory of classificatory sorting strategies i. clustering systems. The Computer Journal 10 3 (1967) 271-277
10. Leydesdorff L. Words and co-words as indiactors of intellectual organization. Research Policy 18 (1989) 209-223
11. Leydesdorff L. Why words and co-words cannot map the development of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 45 5 (1997) 418-427
12. Liu X., Bollen J., Nelson M.L., and de Sompel H.V. Co-authorship networks in the digital library research community. Information Processing and Management 41 (2005) 1462-1480
13. Newman M.E.J. Scientific collaboration networks. I. Network construction and fundamental results. Physical Review (2001) 64
14. Newman M.E.J. Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science (2004) 5200-5205
15. Porter M.F. An algorithm for suffix stripping. Program: Automated Library and Information Systems 14 3 (1980) 130-137
16. Rodriguez, M. A., & Bollen, J. (2005). Simulating network influence algorithms using particle-swarms: Pagerank and pagerank-priors. Technical report. Los Alamos National Laboratory [LAUR-05-6469].
17. Salton G. Term-weighting approaches in automatic text retrieval. Information Processing and Management 24 5 (1998) 513-523
18. Shannon C.E. A matematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal 27 (1948) 379-423
19. Sumner, T. (2005). Report on the fifth ACM/IEEE joint conference on digital libraries-cyberinfrastructure for research and education. D-Lib Magazine, 11(7/8).
20. Wei, J. C., Hartvigsen, D., & Czuchlewski, R. (1999). The conference paper-reviewer assignment problem. Decision Science, 30(3).
21. White, S., & Smyth, P. (2003). Algorithms for estimating relative importance in networks. In KDD '03: Proceedings of the ninth ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining (pp. 266-275). New York, NY, USA: ACM Press.