What factors determine citation counts of publications in chemistry besides their quality?

Journal of Informetrics

Volumn 6, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 11-18

  Bornmann, Lutz ^a   Schier, Hermann ^b   Marx, Werner ^b   Daniel, Hans Dieter ^c,d  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE   (Germany)

^b MAX PLANCK INSTITUT FÜR FESTKÖRPERFORSCHUNG   (Germany)

^c ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^d UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Chemistry; Citation counts; Scientific quality; Single publication h index

Indexed keywords

EID: 80054970257     PISSN: 17511577     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2011.08.004     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Baird L.M., Oppenheim C. Do citations matter?. Journal of Information Science 1994, 20(1):2-15.
2. Bayer A.E., Folger J. Some correlates of a citation measure of productivity in science. Sociology of Education 1966, 39(4):381-390.
3. Bornmann L., Daniel H.-D. Selecting scientific excellence through committee peer review - A citation analysis of publications previously published to approval or rejection of post-doctoral research fellowship applicants. Scientometrics 2006, 68(3):427-440.
4. Bornmann L., Daniel H.-D. What do we know about the h index?. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2007, 58(9):1381-1385. 10.1002/asi.20609.
5. Bornmann L., Daniel H.-D. The effectiveness of the peer review process: Inter-referee agreement and predictive validity of manuscript refereeing at Angewandte Chemie. Angewandte Chemie International Edition 2008, 47(38):7173-7178. 10.1002/anie.200800513.
6. Bornmann L., Daniel H.-D. Selecting manuscripts for a high impact journal through peer review: A citation analysis of Communications that were accepted by Angewandte Chemie International Edition, or rejected but published elsewhere. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2008, 59(11):1841-1852. 10.1002/asi.20901.
7. Bornmann L., Daniel H.-D. What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior. Journal of Documentation 2008, 64(1):45-80. 10.1108/00220410810844150.
8. Bornmann L., Daniel H.-D. Extent of type I and type II errors in editorial decisions: A case study on Angewandte Chemie International Edition. Journal of Informetrics 2009, 3(4):348-352.
9. Bornmann L., Daniel H.-D. The luck of the referee draw: The effect of exchanging reviews. Learned Publishing 2009, 22(2):117-125. 10.1087/2009207.
10. Bornmann L., Daniel H.-D. The state of h index research. Is the h index the ideal way to measure research performance?. EMBO Reports 2009, 10(1):2-6. 10.1038/embor.2008.233.
11. Bornmann L., Daniel H.-D. The manuscript reviewing process: Empirical research on review requests, review sequences and decision rules in peer review. Library & Information Science Research 2010, 32(1):5-12. 10.1016/j.lisr.2009.07.010.
12. Bornmann L., Marx W., Schier H., Rahm E., Thor A., Daniel H.D. Convergent validity of bibliometric Google Scholar data in the field of chemistry. Citation counts for papers that were accepted by Angewandte Chemie International Edition or rejected but published elsewhere, using Google Scholar, Science Citation Index, Scopus, and Chemical Abstracts. Journal of Informetrics 2009, 3(1):27-35. 10.1016/j.joi.2008.11.001.
13. Bornmann L., Mutz R., Marx W., Schier H., Daniel H.-D. A multilevel modelling approach to investigating the predictive validity of editorial decisions: Do the editors of a high-profile journal select manuscripts that are highly cited after publication?. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society - Series A (Statistics in Society) 2011, 174(part 4). 10.1111/j.1467-985X.2011.00689.x.
14. Bornmann L., Weymuth C., Daniel H.-D. A content analysis of referees' comments: How do comments on manuscripts rejected by a high-impact journal and later published in either a low- or high-impact journal differ?. Scientometrics 2010, 83(2):493-506.
15. Boyack K.W., Klavans R. Predicting the importance of current papers. Proceedings of the 10th international conference of the international society for scientometrics and informetrics 2005, Vol. 1:335-342. Karolinska University Press, Stockholm, Sweden.
16. Callaham M., Wears R.L., Weber E. Journal prestige, publication bias, and other characteristics associated with citation of published studies in peer-reviewed journals. Journal of the American Medical Association 2002, 287(21):2847-2850.
17. Cole J.R., Cole S. Social stratification in science 1973, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, MA, USA.
18. Cole S. Making science. Between nature and society 1992, Cambridge, MA, USA, Harvard University Press.
19. Cozzens S.E. Comparing the sciences - Citation context analysis of papers from neuropharmacology and the sociology of science. Social Studies of Science 1985, 15(1):127-153.
20. Evidence Ltd The use of bibliometrics to measure research quality in UK higher education institutions 2007, Universities UK, London, UK.
21. Figueredo E. The numerical equivalence between the impact factor of journals and the quality of the articles. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2006, 57(11):1561.
22. Garfield E. Citation indexing for studying science. Nature 1970, 227(5259):669-671.
23. Garfield E. Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation: Journals can be ranked by frequency and impact of citations for science policy studies. Science 1972, 178(4060):471-479.
24. Garfield E. Highly cited authors. Scientist 2002, 16(7):10.
25. Garfield E. The history and meaning of the Journal Impact Factor. Journal of the American Medical Association 2006, 295(1):90-93.
26. Glänzel W., Debackere K., Thijs B., Schubert A. A concise review on the role of author self-citations in information science, bibliometrics and science policy. Scientometrics 2006, 67(2):263-277.
27. Glänzel W., Schubert A. A characterization of scientometric distributions based on harmonic means. Scientometrics 1993, 26(1):81-96.
28. Harnad S. Open Access scientometrics and the UK Research Assessment Exercise. Proceedings of the 11th conference of the international society for scientometrics and informetrics 2007, Vol. 1:27-33. Spanish Research Council (CSIC), Madrid, Spain.
29. Hemlin S. Research on research evaluations. Social Epistemology 1996, 10(2):209-250.
30. Hirsch J.E. An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2005, 102(46):16569-16572. 10.1073/pnas.0507655102.
31. Hosmer D.W., Lemeshow S. Applied logistic regression 2000, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Chichester, UK. 2nd ed.
32. Kulkarni A.V., Busse J.W., Shams I. Characteristics associated with citation rate of the medical literature. PLoS One 2007, 2(5). 10.1371/journal.pone.0000403.
33. Lancho-Barrantes B.S., Guerrero-Bote V.P., Moya-Anegon F. What lies behind the averages and significance of citation indicators in different disciplines? [Article]. Journal of Information Science 2010, 36(3):371-382. 10.1177/0165551510366077.
34. Lansingh V.C., Carter M.J. Does Open Access in ophthalmology affect how articles are subsequently cited in research? [Article]. Ophthalmology 2009, 116(8):1425-1431. 10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.12.052.
35. Lawani S.M. Some bibliometric correlates of quality in scientific research. Scientometrics 1986, 9(1-2):13-25.
36. Leimu R., Koricheva J. What determines the citation frequency of ecological papers?. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 2005, 20(1):28-32.
37. Lewison G. Gastroenterology research in the United Kingdom: Funding sources and impact. Gut 1998, 43(2):288-293.
38. Long J.S., Freese J. Regression models for categorical dependent variables using Stata 2006, Stata Press, Stata Corporation, College Station, TX, USA. 2nd ed.
39. MacRoberts M.H., MacRoberts B.R. Problems of citation analysis: A study of uncited and seldom-cited influences. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2010, 61(1):1-12.
40. Martin B.R., Irvine J. Assessing basic research - some partial indicators of scientific progress in radio astronomy. Research Policy 1983, 12(2):61-90.
41. Meadows A.J. Communicating research 1998, Academic Press, London, UK.
42. Merton R.K. The Matthew effect in science. Science 1968, 159(3810):56-63.
43. Narin F. Evaluative bibliometrics: The use of publication and citation analysis in the evaluation of scientific activity 1976, Computer Horizons, Cherry Hill, NJ, USA.
44. Neuhaus C., Daniel H.-D. A new reference standard for citation analysis in chemistry and related fields based on the sections of Chemical Abstracts. Scientometrics 2009, 78(2):219-229.
45. Nicolaisen J. The J-shaped distribution of citedness. Journal of Documentation 2002, 58(4):383-395.
46. Oppenheim C. The correlation between citation counts and the 1992 research assessment exercise ratings for British research in genetics, anatomy and archaeology. Journal of Documentation 1997, 53(5):477-487.
47. Opthof T., Wilde A.A.M. The Hirsch-index: A simple, new tool for the assessment of scientific output of individual scientists. The case of Dutch professors in clinical cardiology [Article]. Netherlands Heart Journal 2009, 17(4):145-154.
48. Peters H.P.F., van Raan A.F.J. On determinants of citation scores - A case study in chemical engineering. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 1994, 45(1):39-49.
49. Rabe-Hesketh S., Everitt B. A handbook of statistical analyses using Stata 2004, Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL, USA.
50. Schubert A. Using the h-index for assessing single publications. Scientometrics 2009, 78(3):559-565.
51. Seglen P.O. The skewness of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 1992, 43(9):628-638.
52. Seglen P.O. Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. British Medical Journal 1997, 314(7079):498-502.
53. StataCorp. Stata statistical software: Release 11 2009, Stata Corporation, College Station, TX, USA.
54. Thor A., Bornmann L. The calculation of the single publication h index and related performances measures: A Web application based on Google Scholar data. Online Information Review 2011, 35(2):291-300.
55. Thorngate W., Dawes R.M., Foddy M. Judging merit 2009, Psychology Press, New York, NY, USA.
56. Tijssen R.J.W., van Leeuwen T.N., van Raan A.F.J. Mapping the scientific performance of German medical research. An international comparative bibliometric study 2002, Stuttgart, Germany, Schattauer.
57. Valderas J.M. Why do team-authored papers get cited more?. Science 2007, 317(5844):1496. 10.1126/science.317.5844.1496b.
58. van Eck N.J., Waltman L. Generalizing the h- and g-indices. Journal of Informetrics 2008, 2(4):263-271.
59. van Raan A.F.J. Advanced bibliometric methods as quantitative core of peer review based evaluation and foresight exercises. Scientometrics 1996, 36(3):397-420.
60. van Raan A.F.J., Visser M.S., van Leeuwen T.N., van Wijk E. Bibliometric analysis of psychotherapy research: Performance assessment and position in the journal landscape. Psychotherapy Research 2003, 13(4):511-528.
61. Vieira E.S., Gomes J.A.N.F. Citations to scientific articles: Its distribution and dependence on the article features. Journal of Informetrics 2010, 4(1):1-13. 10.1016/j.joi.2009.06.002.
62. Webster G.D., Jonason P.K., Schember T.O. Hot topics and popular papers in evolutionary psychology: Analyses of title words and citation counts in Evolution and Human Behavior, 1979-2008. Evolutionary Psychology 2009, 7(3):348-362.
63. Willis D.L., Bahler C.D., Neuberger M.M., Dahm P. Predictors of citations in the urological literature [Review]. BJU International 2011, 107(12):1876-1880. 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.10028.x.