The skewness of science in 219 sub-fields and a number of aggregates

Scientometrics

Volumn 88, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 385-397

  Albarrán, Pedro ^a   Crespo, Juan A ^b   Ortuño, Ignacio ^c   Ruiz Castillo, Javier ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALICANTE   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE MADRID   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSIDAD CARLOS III DE MADRID   (Spain)

Author keywords

Characteristic Scores; Citation analysis; Power laws; Research performance

Indexed keywords

EID: 79959645103     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-011-0407-9     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Albarrán, P., Crespo, J., Ortuño, I., & Ruiz-Castillo, J. (2011). The skewness of science in 219 sub-fields and a number of aggregates. Working Paper 11-09, Universidad Carlos III.
2. Albarrán, P., & Ruiz-Castillo, J. (2011). References made and citations received by scientific articles. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62, 40-49.
3. Burke, P., & Butler, L. (1996). Publication types, citation rates, and evaluation. Scientometrics, 37, 473-494.
4. Clauset, A., Shalizi, C. R., & Newman, M. E. J. (2009). Power-law distributions in empirical data. SIAM Review, 51, 661-703.
5. Dorogovstev, S., & Mendes, J. (2001). Scaling properties of scale-free evolving networks: Continuous approach. Physical Review E, 85, 4633-4636.
6. Egghe, L. (2005). Power laws in the information production process: Lotkaian informetrics. Kidlington: Elsevier Academic Press.
7. Glänzel, W. (2007a). Characteristic scores and scales: A bibliometric analysis of subject characteristics based on long-term citation observation. Journal of Informetrics, 1, 92-102.
8. Glänzel, W. (2007b). Some new applications of the h-index. ISSI Newsletter, 3, 28-31.
9. Glänzel, W. (2008). On some new bibliometric applications of statistics related to the h-index. Scientometrics, 77, 187-196.
10. Glänzel, W. (2010). The application of characteristics scores and scales to the evaluation and ranking of scientific journals. In Proceedings of INFO 2010 (pp. 1-13). Havan, Cuba.
11. Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2003). A new classification scheme of science fields and subfields designed for scientometric evaluation purposes. Scientometrics, 56, 357-367.
12. Irvine, J., & Martin, B. R. (1984). CERN: Past performance and future prospects. II. The scientific performance of the CERN accelerators. Research Policy, 13, 247-284.
13. Jackson, M., & Rogers, B. (2007). Meeting strangers and friends of friends: How random are social networks? American Economic Review, 97, 890-915.
14. Kleiber, C., & Kotz, S. (2003). Statistical size distributions in economics and actuarial sciences. Hoboken: Wiley.
15. Laherrère, J., & Sornette, D. (1998). Stretched exponential distributions in nature and economy: Fat tails with characteristic scales. European Physical Journal B, 2, 525-539.
16. Lehmann, S., Lautrup, B., & Jackson, A. D. (2003). Citation networks in high energy physics. Physical Review, E68, 026113-026118.
17. Lehmann, S., Lautrup, B., & Jackson, A. D. (2008). A quantitative analysis of indicators of scientific performance. Scientometrics, 76, 369-390.
18. Liang, L., & Rousseau, R. (2010). Reference analysis: A view in the mirror of citation analysis. Geomatics and Information Science of Wuhan University, 35, 6-9.
19. Magyar, G. (1973). Bibliometric analysis of a new research sub-field. Journal of Documentation, 30, 32-40.
20. Narayan, S. (1971). Power law relations in science bibliography-a self consistent interpretation. Journal of Documentation, 27, 83-97.
21. Peterson, G., Presse, S., & Dill, K. (2010). Nonuniversal power law scaling in the probability distribution of scientific citations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107, 16023-16027.
22. Price, D. J. D. S. (1965). Networks of scientific papers. Science, 149, 510-515.
23. Radicchi, F., Fortunato, S., & Castellano, C. (2008). Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105, 17268-17272.
24. Redner, S. (1998). How popular is your paper? An empirical study of the citation distribution. European Physical Journal B, 4, 131-134.
25. Redner, S. (2005). Citation statistics from 110 years of physical review. Physics Today (pp. 49-54).
26. Schubert, A., & Glänzel, W. (2007). A systematic analysis of Hirsh-type indices for journals. Journal of Informetrics, 1, 2179-2184.
27. Schubert, A., Glänzel, W., & Braun, T. (1987). A new methodology for ranking scientific institutions. Scientometrics, 12, 267-292.
28. Schubert, A., Glänzel, W., & Braun, T. (1989). Scientometric datafiles: A comprehensive set of indicators on 2, 649 journals, 96 countries in all major fields, sub-fields 1981-1985. Scientometrics, 16, 3-478.
29. Seglen, P. (1992). The skewness of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43, 628-638.
30. Tijssen, J. W., van Leeuwen, T. (2003). "Bibliometric analysis of world science", extended technical annex to chapter 5 of the third European report on science and technology indicators. Directorate-General for Research. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Community.
31. Tsallis, C., & de Alburquerque, M. P. (2000). Are citations of scientific papers a case of nonextensivity? European Physical Journal B, 13, 777-780.
32. van Raan, A. F. J. (2006). Statistical properties of bibliometric indicators: Research group indicator distributions and correlations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57, 408-430.
33. Wallace, M., Larivière, V., & Gingras, Y. (2009). Modeling a century of citation distributions. Journal of Informetrics, 3, 296-303.
34. Waltman, L., van Eck, N. J., & Noyons, E. (2010). A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks. Journal of Informetrics, 4, 629-635.