Scientometric assessment of engineering in Malaysians universities

Scientometrics

Volumn 96, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 865-879

  Tahira, Muzammil ^a   Alias, Rose Alinda ^a   Bakri, Aryati ^a  

^a UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA   (Malaysia)

Author keywords

Engineering; h index; Malaysia; Research performance evaluation; Scientometric

Indexed keywords

EID: 84881611339     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-013-0961-4     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Amin, M., & Mabe, M. A. (2003). Impact factors: Use and abuse. Medicina (Buenos Aires), 63(4), 347-354.
2. Bakri, A. (2010). Evaluation of computer and information science in Malaysia: A bibliometric analysis. Unpublished PhD thesis, Department of Information Studies, University of Sheffield, 226.
3. Bedeian, A. G., van Fleet, D. D., & Hyman, H. H. (2009). Scientific achievement and editorial board membership. Organizational Research Methods, 12(2), 211-238.
4. Bornmann, L., Wallon, G., & Ledin, A. (2008). Is the h index related to (standard) bibliometric measures and to the assessments by peers? An investigation of the h index by using molecular life sciences data. Research Evaluation, 17(2), 149-156.
5. Bouabid, H., & Martin, B. (2009). Evaluation of Moroccan research using a bibliometric-based approach: Investigation of the validity of the h-index. Scientometrics, 78(2), 203-217.
6. Bouyssou, D., & Marchant, T. (2011). Ranking scientists and departments in a consistent manner. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(9), 1761-1769.
7. Butler, (2003). Explaining Australia's increased share of ISI publications-The effects of a funding formula based on publication counts. Research Policy, 32(1), 143-155.
8. Butler, L., & McAllister, I. (2011). Evaluating university research performance using metrics. European political science, 10, 44-58.
9. Campbell, D. F. J. (2005). Evaluation of University Research in Europe: Conceptual Framework and Comparative Typology. HOFO Working Paper Series 05. 002. Vienna, IFF (Faculty for Interdisciplinary Studies).
10. Coleman, A. (2007). Assessing the value of a journal beyond the impact factor. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(8), 1148-1161.
11. Csajbo′k, E., Berhidi, A., Vasas, L., & Schubert, A. (2007). Hirsch-index for countries based on essential science indicators data. Scientometrics, 73(1), 91-117.
12. Dess, H. M. (2006). Scopus. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, Winter. http://www. istl. org/06-winter/databases4. html. Accessed 16 Dec 2008. Accessed 2 Sep 2007.
13. Donovan, C. (2007). Introduction: Future pathways for science policy and research assessment: Metrics vs. peer review, quality vs. impact. Science and Public Policy, 34(8), 538-542.
14. Engqvist, L., & Frommen, J. (2008). The h-index and self-citations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 99, 11, 270-11274.
15. Franceschini, F., & Maisano, D. (2011). Structured evaluation of the scientific output of academic research groups by recent h-based indicators. Journal of Informetrics, 5, 64-74.
16. Garfield, E. (1999). How can impact factors be improved? BMJ, 313, 411-413.
17. Glänzel, W. (2006). On the h-index: A mathematical approach to a new measure of publication activity and citation impact. Scientometrics, 67(2), 315-321.
18. Glänzel, W., Thijs, B., & Schlemmer, B. (2004). A bibliometric approach to the role of author selfcitations in scientific communication. Scientometrics, 59(1), 63-77.
19. Guan, J. C., & Gao, X. (2008). Exploring the h-index at patent level. Journal of American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(13), 1-6.
20. Harold, L. C. (1975). Note on the possible misuse of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test. Journal of Applied Meteorology, 14(8), 1600-1602.
21. Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102, 16569-16572.
22. Huang, M. H., & Lin, W. Y. C. (2011). Probing the effect of author self-citations on h index: A case study of environmental engineering. Journal of Information Science, 37(5), 453-461.
23. Imperial, J., & Rodriguez-Navarro, A. (2007). Usefulness of Hirsch's h-index to evaluate scientific research in Spain. Scientometrics, 71(2), 271-282.
24. Jacso, P. (2008). The pros and cons of computing the h-index using web of science. Online Information Review, 32(5), 673-688.
25. Lazaridis, L. (2010). Ranking university departments using the mean h-index. Scientometrics, 82, 211-216.
26. Lehmann, S., Jackson, A. D., & Lautrup, B. E. (2006). Measures for measures. Nature, 444, 1003-1004.
27. Lehmann, S., Jackson, A. D., & Lautrup, B. E. (2008). A quantitative analysis of indicators of scientific performance. Scientometrics, 76(2), 369-390.
28. Luz, M. P., et al. (2008). Institutional H-Index: The performance of a new metric in the evaluation of Brazilian psychiatric post-graduation programs. Scientometrics, 77(2), 361-368.
29. Malaysian Science and Technology Information Center (MASTIC) (2004). Science and Technology Knowledge Productivity in Malaysia Bibliometric Study 2003. Technical report. http://www. mastic. gov. my/portals/mastic/publications/Bibliometric/Bibliometric. pdf. Accessed 8 August 2011.
30. Malaysian Science and Technology Information Center (MASTIC) (2008). Malaysian S and T Indicators report 2008. http://www. mastic. gov. my/portals/mastic/publications/Indicators/2008/ExecSummary. pdf. Accessed 15August 2012.
31. Marchant, T. (2009). An axiomatic characterization of the ranking based on the h-index and some other bibliometric rankings of authors. Scientometrics, 80(2), 327-344.
32. Mingers, J. (2007). Measuring the research contribution of management academics using the Hirsch index. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 60, 1143-1153.
33. Moed, H. F. (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation. Dordrecht: Springer.
34. Molinari, A., & Molinari, J. F. (2008). Mathematical aspects of a new criterion for ranking scientific institutions based on the h-index. Scientometrics, 75(2), 339-356.
35. New Web of knowledge, (n. d.). Thomson Reuters. 2011, Accessed 2 Sept 2011.
36. Norris, M., & Oppenheim, C. (2007). Comparing alternatives to the web of science for coverage of the social sciences' literature. Journal of Informetrics, 1(2), 161-169.
37. Norris, M., & Oppenheim, C. (2010). Peer review and the h-index: Two studies. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 221-232.
38. Opthof, T. & Leydedorff, L. (2011). A comment to the paper by Waltman et al. Scientometrics, 88(3), 1011-1016.
39. Pilkington, A. (2008). Engineering management or management of technology? A bibliometric study of IEEE TEM. International Journal of Management Science and Engineering Management, 3(1), 63-70.
40. Prathap, G. (2010). Is there a place for a mock h-index? Scientometrics, 84, 153-165.
41. Prathap, G. (2011). Correlation between h-index, eigenfactor™ and article influence™ of chemical engineering journals (Letter). Current Science, 100(9), 1276.
42. Raj, R. G., & Zainab, A. N. (2012). Relative measure index: A metric to measure quality. Scientometrics,. doi: 10. 1007/s11192-012-0675-z.
43. Schubert, A., & Glänzel, W. (2007). A systematic analysis of Hirsch-type indices for journals. Journal of Informetrics, 1(2), 179-184.
44. SETERA'09 (n. d). http://www. mqa. gov. my/SETARA09/index. cfm. Accessed 12 Sept 2011.
45. Siegel, S., & Castellan, N. J. J. R. (1988). Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw-HiU Book Company.
46. Tahira, M. Alias, R. A. & Bakri, A. (2011). Application of h-index for research evaluation. A study presented in the Annual Post graduate Seminar, PARS'11, November, Information system research group, FSKSM, University of Technology, Malaysia.
47. van Costas, R., Leeuwen, T. N., & Bordons, M. (2012). Self-citations at the meso and individual levels: Effects of different calculation methods. Scientometrics, 82(3), 517-537.
48. van Raan, A. F. J. (2006). Comparison of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judgment for 147 chemistry research groups. Scientometrics, 67, 491-502.
49. van Waltman, L., & Eck, N. J. (2012). The Inconsistency of the h-index. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(2), 406-415.
50. Ye, F. Y. (2009). An investigation on mathematical models of the h-index. Scientometrics, 81(2), 493-498.
51. Yin, C. Y. (2009). Bibliometric analysis of journal articles published by Southeast Asian chemical engineering researchers. Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science, 3(14), 1-13.
52. Yin, C.-Y. (2011). Do impact factor, h-index and eigenfactor™ of chemical engineering journals correlate well with each other and indicate the journals' influence and prestige? Current Science, 100(5), 648-653.
53. Zachos, G. (1991). Research output evaluation of 2 university departments in Greece with the use of bibliometric indicators. Scientometrics, 21, 195-221.