Bibliometric Evaluation of Researchers in the Internet Age

Information Society

Volumn 30, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 349-354

  Bartoli, Alberto ^a   Medvet, Eric ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TRIESTE   (Italy)

Author keywords

academic search engines; bibliometrics; citation counts; Italy; research evaluation; researcher evaluation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84919398058     PISSN: 01972243     EISSN: 10876537     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01972243.2014.944731     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Aitkenhead, D. 2013. Peter Higgs: I wouldn't be productive enough for today's academic system. The Guardian, December 6. http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/06/peter-higgs-boson-academic-system (accessed June 19, 2014).
2. Beel, J., G. Bela, and E. Wilde. 2010. Academic search engine optimization—ASEO. Journal of Scholarly Publishing 41(2): 176–90.
3. Bornmann, L., and H.D. Daniel. 2008. What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior. Journal of Documentation 64(1): 45–80.
4. Gargouri, Y., C. Hajjem, V. Lariviere, Y. Gingras, L. Carr, T. Brody, and S. Harnad. 2010. Self-selected or mandated, open access increases citation impact for higher quality research. PLoS One 5(10): e13636.
5. Grudin, J. 2013. Varieties of conference experience. The Information Society 29(2): 71–77.
6. IEEE Board of Directors. 2013. Appropriate use of bibliometric indicators for the assessment of journals, research proposals, and individuals. http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/ieee_bibliometric_statement_sept_2013.pdf (accessed June 19, 2014).
7. Labbe, C. 2010. Ike Antkare one of the great stars in the scientific firmament. International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics Newsletter 6(2): 48–52.
8. Lawrence, S. 2001. Free online availability substantially increases a paper's impact. Nature 411: 521.
9. Lozano, G.A., V. Larivière, and Y. Gingras. 2012. The weakening relationship between the impact factor and papers’ citations in the digital age. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 63(11): 2140–45.
10. Meyer, B., C. Choppy, J. Staunstrup, and J. van Leeuwen. 2009. Research evaluation for computer science. Communication of the ACM 52(4): 31–34.
11. Schonfeld, R., and R. Housewright. 2010. Faculty survey 2009: Key insights for libraries, publishers, and societies. http://www.sr.ithaka.org/research-publications/faculty-survey-2009 (accessed June 19, 2014).
12. Technopolis. 2009. Identification and dissemination of lessons learned by institutions participating in the Research Excellence Framework (REF) bibliometrics pilot: Results of the Round Two Consultation—Report to HEFCE by Technopolis. http://www.hefce.ac.uk/media/hefce/content/pubs/2009/rd1809/rd18_09.pdf (accessed June 25, 2014).
13. Wallace, M.L., V. Larivière, and Y. Gingras. 2009. Modeling a century of citation distributions. Journal of Informetrics 3(4): 296–303.