Regression for citation data: An evaluation of different methods

Journal of Informetrics

Volumn 8, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 963-971

  Thelwall, Mike ^a   Wilson, Paul ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WOLVERHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Altmetrics; Citation distributions; Informetrics; Lognormal; Powerlaw; Regression

Indexed keywords

LINEAR REGRESSION;

ALTMETRICS; CITATION DISTRIBUTION; INFORMETRICS; LOG-NORMAL; POWER-LAW; REGRESSION;

CODES (SYMBOLS);

EID: 84908696351     PISSN: 17511577     EISSN: 18755879     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2014.09.011     Document Type: Article

References (75)

1. Abramo G., Cicero T., D'Angelo C.A. National peer-review research assessment exercises for the hard sciences can be a complete waste of money: The Italian case. Scientometrics 2013, 95(1):311-324.
2. Abramo G., D'Angelo C.A., Di Costa F. National research assessment exercises: A comparison of peer review and bibliometrics rankings. Scientometrics 2011, 89(3):929-941.
3. ACUMEN Guidelines for good evaluation practice with the ACUMEN Portfolio 2014, http://research-acumen.eu/wp-content/uploads/Guidelines-Portfolio-TOC-document.v13dx.pdf.
4. Adie E., Roe W. Altmetric: Enriching scholarly content with article-level discussion and metrics. Learned Publishing 2013, 26(1):11-17.
5. Aitchison J., Ho C.H. The multivariate Poisson-log normal distribution. Biometrika 1989, 76(4):643-653.
6. Aksnes D.W. Characteristics of highly cited papers. Research Evaluation 2003, 12(3):159-170.
7. Aksnes D.W., Rørstad K., Piro F.N., Sivertsen G. Are mobile researchers more productive and cited than non-mobile researchers? A large-scale study of Norwegian scientists. Research Evaluation 2013, 22(4):215-223.
8. Almind T.C., Ingwersen P. Informetric analyses on the world wide web: Methodological approaches to 'webometrics'. Journal of Documentation 1997, 53(4):404-426.
9. Anderson D.L., Smart W., Tressler J. Evaluating research - Peer review team assessment and journal based bibliographic measures: New Zealand PBRF research output scores in 2006. New Zealand Economic Papers 2013, 47(2):140-157.
10. ARC Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) 2014, http://www.arc.gov.au/era/.
11. Baldi S. Normative versus social constructivist processes in the allocation of citations: A network-analytic model. American Sociological Review 1998, 63(6):829-846.
12. Baumgartner S.E., Leydesdorff L. Group-based trajectory modeling (GBTM) of citations in scholarly literature: Dynamic qualities of transient and sticky knowledge claims. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 2014, 65(4):797-811.
13. Borgman C., Furner J. Scholarly communication and bibliometrics. Annual review of information science and technology 2002, Vol. 36:3-72. Information Today, Inc., Medford, NJ.
14. Bornmann L., Williams R. How to calculate the practical significance of citation impact differences? An empirical example from evaluative institutional bibliometrics using adjusted predictions and marginal effects. Journal of Informetrics 2013, 7(2):562-574.
15. Butler L. Explaining Australia's increased share of ISI publications - The effects of a funding formula based on publication counts. Research Policy 2003, 32(1):143-155.
16. Butler L., Mcallister I. Evaluating university research performance using metrics. European Political Science 2011, 10(1):44-58.
17. Chen C. Predictive effects of structural variation on citation counts. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2012, 63(3):431-449.
18. Cole J.R. A short history of the use of citations as a measure of the impact of scientific and scholarly work. The Web of Knowledge: A Festschrift in Honor of Eugene Garfield 2000, 281-300. Information Today, Medford, NJ.
19. de Solla Price D. Networks of scientific papers. Science 1965, 169:510-515.
20. Didegah F., Thelwall M. Determinants of research citation impact in nanoscience and nanotechnology. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2013, 64(5):1055-1064.
21. Didegah F., Thelwall M. Which factors help authors produce the highest impact research? Collaboration, journal and document properties. Journal of Informetrics 2013, 7(4):861-873.
22. Dobson A.J., Barnett A. An introduction to generalized linear models 2008, Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL. 3rd ed.
23. Dragos C.M., Dragos S.L. Scientific productivity versus efficiency of R&D financing: Bibliometric analysis of African countries. Current Science 2014, 106(7):942-945.
24. Evans T.S., Hopkins N., Kaube B.S. Universality of performance indicators based on citation and reference counts. Scientometrics 2012, 93(2):473-495.
25. Foo J.Y.A., Tan X.J.A. Analysis and implications of retraction period and coauthorship of fraudulent publications. Accountability in Research 2014, 21(3):198-210.
26. Franceschet M., Costantini A. The first Italian research assessment exercise: A bibliometric perspective. Journal of Informetrics 2011, 5(2):275-291.
27. Garson D.G. General linear models: Univariate GLM, ANOVA/ANCOVA, repeated measures 2012, Statistical Associates Publishers, Asheboro, NC.
28. Golosovsky M., Solomon S. Runaway events dominate the heavy tail of citation distributions. The European Physical Journal - Special Topics 2012, 205(1):303-311.
29. He Z.L. International collaboration does not have greater epistemic authority. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2009, 60(10):2151-2164.
30. Hilbe J.M. Negative binomial regression 2011, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 2nd ed.
31. Kousha K., Thelwall M. Web impact metrics for research assessment. Beyond bibliometrics: Harnessing multidimensional indicators of scholarly impact 2014, 289-306. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. B. Cronin, C. Sugimoto (Eds.).
32. Kutlar A., Kabasakal A., Ekici M.S. Contributions of Turkish academicians supervising PhD dissertations and their universities to economics: An evaluation of the 1990-2011 period. Scientometrics 2013, 97(3):639-658.
33. Leydesdorff L., Bensman S. Classification and powerlaws: The logarithmic transformation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2006, 57(11):1470-1486.
34. Li X., Thelwall M., Giustini D. Validating online reference managers for scholarly impact measurement. Scientometrics 2012, 91(2):461-471.
35. MacRoberts M.H., MacRoberts B.R. Problems of citation analysis. Scientometrics 1996, 36(3):435-444.
36. Mavros M.N., Bardakas V., Rafailidis P.I., Sardi T.A., Demetriou E., Falagas M.E. Comparison of number of citations to full original articles versus brief reports. Scientometrics 2013, 94(1):203-206.
37. McCain K.W. Assessing obliteration by incorporation: Issues and caveats. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2012, 63(11):2129-2139.
38. McDonald J.D. Understanding journal usage: A statistical analysis of citation and use. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2007, 58(1):39-50.
39. Merton R.K. The Matthew effect in science. Science 1968, 159(3810):56-63.
40. Merton R.K. The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations 1973, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
41. Millar R.B. Maximum likelihood estimation and inference: With examples in R, SAS and ADMB 2011, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
42. Mohammadi E., Thelwall M. Assessing non-standard article impact using F1000 labels. Scientometrics 2013, 97(2):383-395.
43. Mohammadi E., Thelwall M. Mendeley readership altmetrics for the social sciences and humanities: Research evaluation and knowledge flows. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 2014, 65(8):1627-1638.
44. Mryglod O., Kenna R., Holovatch Y., Berche B. Comparison of a citation-based indicator and peer review for absolute and specific measures of research-group excellence. Scientometrics 2013, 97(3):767-777.
45. Peters H.P.F., van Raan A.F. On determinants of citation scores: A case study in chemical engineering. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 1994, 45(1):39-49.
46. Piwowar H., Priem J. The power of altmetrics on a CV. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2013, 39(4):10-13.
47. Priem J. Altmetrics. Beyond bibliometrics: Harnessing multidimensional indicators of scholarly impact 2014, 263-287. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. B. Cronin, C. Sugimoto (Eds.).
48. Priem J., Taraborelli D., Groth P., Neylon C. Altmetrics: A manifesto 2010, http://altmetrics.org/.
49. Radicchi F., Fortunato S., Castellano C. Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2008, 105(45):17268-17272.
50. REF Citation data 2013, http://www.ref.ac.uk/subguide/citationdata/.
51. Rigby J. Looking for the impact of peer review: Does count of funding acknowledgements really predict research impact?. Scientometrics 2013, 94(1):57-73.
52. Seglen P.O. The skewness of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 1992, 43(9):628-638.
53. Shema H., Bar-Ilan J., Thelwall M. Do blog citations correlate with a higher number of future citations? Research blogs as a potential source for alternative metrics. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 2014, 65(5):1018-1027.
54. Sin S.C.J. International coauthorship and citation impact: A bibliometric study of six LIS journals, 1980-2008. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2011, 62(9):1770-1783.
55. Sooryamoorthy R. Do types of collaboration change citation? Collaboration and citation patterns of South African science publications. Scientometrics 2009, 81(1):177-193.
56. Stasinopoulos D.M., Rigby R.A. Generalized additive models for location scale and shape (GAMLSS) in R. Journal of Statistical Software 2007, 23(7):1-46.
57. Stewart J.A. Achievement and ascriptive processes in the recognition of scientific articles. Social Forces 1983, 62(1):166-189.
58. Stringer M.J., Sales-Pardo M., Amaral L.A.N. Statistical validation of a global model for the distribution of the ultimate number of citations accrued by papers published in a scientific journal. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2010, 61(7):1377-1385.
59. Tabachnick B.G., Fidell L.S. Using multivariate statistics 2001, Allyn & Bacon, Needham Heights, MA. 4th ed.
60. Tang L. Does birds of a feather flock together matter-Evidence from a longitudinal study on US-China scientific collaboration. Journal of Informetrics 2013, 7(2):330-344.
61. Thelwall M., Maflahi N. Are scholarly articles disproportionately read in their own country? An analysis of Mendeley readers. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 2014, (in press).
62. Thelwall M., Wilson P. Distributions for cited articles from individual subjects and years. Journal of Informetrics 2014, 8(4):824-839. http://www.scit.wlv.ac.uk/~cm1993/papers/DistributionsForCitedArticlesPreprintx.pdf.
63. Thelwall M., Haustein S., Larivière V., Sugimoto C.R. Do altmetrics work? Twitter and ten other social web services. PLOS ONE 2013, 8(5):e64841.
64. van Raan A.F.J. The influence of international collaboration on the impact of research results. Scientometrics 1998, 42(3):423-428.
65. Walters G.D. Predicting subsequent citations to articles published in twelve crime-psychology journals: Author impact versus journal impact. Scientometrics 2006, 69(3):499-510.
66. Waltman L., van Eck N.J., van Leeuwen T.N., Visser M.S., van Raan A.F. Towards a new crown indicator: Some theoretical considerations. Journal of Informetrics 2011, 5(1):37-47.
67. Willis D.L., Bahler C.D., Neuberger M.M., Dahm P. Predictors of citations in the urological literature. BJU International 2011, 107(12):1876-1880.
68. Wu J. Investigating the universal distributions of normalized indicators and developing field-independent index. Journal of Informetrics 2013, 7(1):63-71.
69. Xia J., Nakanishi K. Self-selection and the citation advantage of open access articles. Online Information Review 2012, 36(1):40-51.
70. Yan K.K., Gerstein M. The spread of scientific information: Insights from the web usage statistics in PLoS article-level metrics. PLoS ONE 2011, 6(5):e19917.
71. Yao Z., Peng X.L., Zhang L.J., Xu X.J. Modeling nonuniversal citation distributions: The role of scientific journals. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2014, 2014(4):P04029.
72. Yitzhaki M. The 'language preference' in sociology: Measures of 'language self-citation', 'relative own-language preference indicator', and 'mutual use of languages'. Scientometrics 1998, 41(1-2):243-254.
73. Yoshikane F. Multiple regression analysis of a patent's citation frequency and quantitative characteristics: The case of Japanese patents. Scientometrics 2013, 96(1):365-379.
74. Yu T., Yu G., Wang M.Y. Classification method for detecting coercive self-citation in journals. Journal of Informetrics 2014, 8(1):123-135.
75. Zahedi Z., Costas R., Wouters P. How well developed are altmetrics? A cross-disciplinary analysis of the presence of 'alternative metrics' in scientific publications. Scientometrics 2014, 101(2):1491-1513.