Citation expectations: Are they realized? Study of the Matthew index for Russian papers published abroad

Scientometrics

Volumn 83, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 739-749

  Pislyakov, Vladimir ^a   Dyachenko, Ekaterina ^a  

^a NATIONAL RESEARCH UNIVERSITY HIGHER SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS   (Russian Federation)

Author keywords

Chemistry; Citedness; International comparison; Matthew index; Physics

Indexed keywords

EID: 77952322489     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-009-0144-5     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Ball, R., Mittermaier, B., & Tunger, D. (2009). Creation of journal-based publication profiles of scientific institutions-a methodology for the interdisciplinary comparison of scientific research based on the J-factor. Scientometrics, 81, 381-392.
2. Bonitz, M. (2002). Ranking of nations and heightened competition in Matthew core journals: Two faces of the Matthew effect for countries. Library Trends, 50, 440-460.
3. Bonitz, M. (2005). Ten years Matthew effect for countries. Scientometrics, 64, 375-379.
4. Bonitz, M., Bruckner, E., & Scharnhorst, A. (1997). Characteristics and impact of the Matthew effect for countries. Scientometrics, 40, 407-422.
5. Bonitz, M., Bruckner, E., & Scharnhorst, A. (1999). The Matthew index-concentration patterns and Matthew core journals. Scientometrics, 44, 361-378.
6. Bonitz, M., & Scharnhorst, A. (2001). Competition in science and the Matthew core journals. Scientometrics, 51, 37-54.
7. Bordons, M., Fernandez, M. T., & Gomez, I. (2002). Advantages and limitations in the use of impact factor measures for the assessment of research performance in a peripheral country. Scientometrics, 53, 195-206.
8. Egghe, L. (1988). Mathematical relations between impact factors and average number of citations. Information Processing & Management, 24, 567-576.
9. Larivière, V., Gingras, Y. (in print). The impact factor's Matthew effect: A natural experiment in bibliometrics. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. Retrieved September 18, 2009 from http://arxiv. org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0908/0908. 3177. pdf.
10. Medoff, M. H. (2006). Evidence of a Harvard and Chicago Matthew effect. Journal of Economic Methodology, 13, 485-506.
11. Merton, R. K. (1968). The Matthew effect in science. Science, 3810, 56-63.
12. Merton, R. K. (1988). The Matthew effect in science, II: Cumulative advantage and the symbolism of intellectual property. ISIS, 79, 606-623.
13. Morgan, P. L., Farkas, G., & Hibel, J. (2008). Matthew effects for whom? Learning Disability Quarterly, 31, 187-198.
14. Rousseau, R. (1988). Citation distribution of pure mathematics journals. In L. Egghe & R. Rousseau (Eds.), Informetrics 87/88 (pp. 249-262). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
15. Schubert, A., & Braun, T. (1986). Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact. Scientometrics, 9, 281-291.
16. Schubert, A., Glänzel, W., & Braun, T. (1983). Relative citation rate: A new indicator for measuring the impact of publications. In D. Tomov & L. Dimitrova (Eds.), Proceedings of the first national conference with international participation on scientometrics and linguistics of scientific text (pp. 80-81). Bulgaria: Varna.
17. Thomson Reuters (2009). Why the number of articles in Web of Science has gone down, and the number of proceedings papers has gone up. Retrieved April 9, 2009 from http://isiwebofknowledge. com/products_tools/multidisciplinary/webofscience/cpci/usingproceedings/.
18. Vinkler, P. (1997). Relations of relative scientometric impact indicators. The relative publication strategy index. Scientometrics, 40, 163-169.
19. Zitt, M., Ramanana-Rahary, S., & Bassecoulard, E. (2003). Correcting glasses help fair comparisons in international science landscape: Country indicators as a function of ISI database delineation. Scientometrics, 56, 259-282.