Bibliometric analysis of psychotherapy research: Performance assessment and position in the journal landscape

Psychotherapy Research

Volumn 13, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 511-528

  Van Raan, Anthony F J ^a   Visser, Martijn S ^a   Van Leeuwen, Thed N ^a   Van Wijk, Erik ^a  

^a LEIDEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY; HUMAN; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHIATRY; PSYCHOTHERAPY; PUBLICATION; REVIEW;

EID: 4644314563     PISSN: 10503307     EISSN: 14684381     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ptr/kpg038     Document Type: Review

References (19)

1. Glänzel, W. (1992). Publication dynamics and citation impact: A multi-dimensional approach to scientometric research evaluation. In P. Weingart, R. Sehringer, & M. Winterhager (Eds.), Representations of science and technology (pp. 209-224). Leiden, the Netherlands: DSWO Press.
2. Horrobin, D. F. (1990). The philosophical basis of peer review and the suppression of innovation. Journal of the American Medical Association. 263, 1438-1441.
3. Meertens, R. W., Nederhof, A. J., & Wilke, H. A. M. (1992). Social psychological research in The Netherlands, 1980-1988. European Journal of Social Psychology, 22, 93-100.
4. Moed, H. F., De Bruin, R. E., & Van Leeuwen, T. N. (1995). New bibliometric tools for the assessment of national research performance: Database description, overview of indicators and first applications. Scientometrics, 33, 381-422.
5. Moed, H. F., & Van Leeuwen, T. N. (1995). Improving the accuracy of the Institute for Scientific Information's journal impact factors. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 46, 461-467.
6. Moed, H. F., & Van Leeuwen, T. N. (1996). Impact factors can mislead. Nature, 381, 186.
7. Moxham, H., & Anderson, J. (1992). Peer review. A view from the inside. Science and Technology Policy, 5, 7-15.
8. Nederhof, A. J., Van Leeuwen, T. N., & Visser, M. S. (1997). A comparative bibliometric study of the Kurt Lewin Institute (CWTS-report 1997-10). Leiden, the Netherlands: CWTS.
9. Nederhof, A. J., Van Leeuwe, T. N., & Visser, M. S. (2000). Bibliometric profiles of academic psychology in The Netherlands (CWTS-report 2000-05). Leiden, the Netherlands: CWTS.
10. Noyons, E. C. M. (1999). Bibliometric mapping as a science policy and research management tool. Leiden, the Netherlands: DSWO Press.
11. Rinia, E. J., Van Leeuwen, T. N., Van Vuren, H. G., & Van Raan, A. F. J. (1998). Comparative analysis of a set of bibliometric indicators and central peer review criteria. Evaluation of condensed matter physics in the Netherlands. Research Policy, 27, 95-107.
12. SAS Institute. (1996). SAS//STAT software: Changes and enhancements through release 6.11. Cary, NC: Author.
13. Schubert, A., & Glänzel, W. (1983). Statistical reliability of comparisons based on the citation impact of scientific publications. Scientometrics, 5, 59-74.
14. Tijssen, R. J. W. (1992). Cartography of science: Scientotnetric mapping with multidimensional scaling methods. Leiden, the Netherlands: DSWO Press.
15. Tijssen, R. J. W., & Van Raan, A. F. J. (1989). Mapping co-word structures: A comparison of multidimensional scaling and Leximappe. Scientometrics, 15, 283-295.
16. Van Raan, A. F. J. (1996). Advanced bibliometric methods as quantitative core of peer review based evaluation and foresight exercises. Scientometrics, 36, 397-420.
17. Van Raan, A. F. J. (1998). Assessing the social sciences: The use of advanced bibliometric methods as a necessary complement of peer review. Research Evaluation, 7, 2-6.
18. Van Raan, A. F. J., Visser, M., & Van Leeuwen, T. N. (2001). A bibliometric methodology for exploring interdisciplinary, "unorthodox" fields of science. A case study of environmental medicine. In S. Maasen & M. Wintherhager (Eds.), Science studies. Probing the dynamics of scientific knowledge (pp. 87-122). Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag.
19. VSNU. (1999). Assessment of research quality: Psychology. Utrecht, The Netherlands: VSNU.