A bibliometric comparison of the research of three UK business schools

Lecture Notes in Engineering and Computer Science

Volumn 2210, Issue January, 2014, Pages

  Mingers, John C ^a   Lipitakis, Evangelia A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENT   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Citations; Crown indicator; Leiden methodology; Research quality assessment

Indexed keywords

COMPUTERS;

ACADEMIC DEPARTMENT; BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT; CITATIONS; LEIDEN METHODOLOGY; QUANTITATIVE METHOD; RANKING METHODOLOGIES; RESEARCH QUALITY; RESEARCH STUDIES;

SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS;

EID: 84938341541     PISSN: 20780958     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (33)

1. Horrobin, D. (1990). The philosophical basis of peer review and the suppression of innovation. Journal of the American Medical Association, 263, 1438-1441.
2. Moxham, H., & Anderson, J. (1992). Peer review: A view from the inside. Science and Technology Policy, 5, 7-15.
3. Rinia, E. J., van Leeuwen, T. N., van Vuren, H. G., & van Raan, A. F. J. (1998). Comparative analysis of a set of bibliometric indicators and central peer review criteria: Evaluation of condensed matter physics in the Netherlands. Research Policy, 27, 95-107.
4. van Raan, A. (2003). The use of bibliometric analysis in research performance assessment and monitoring of interdisciplinary scientific developments. Technology Assessment - Theory and Practice, 1, 20-29.
5. Nederhof, A., Van Leeuwen, T., & Tijssen, R. (2004). International benchmarking and bibliometric monitoring of UK research performance in the social sciences. In. Leiden: Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS), University of Leiden.
6. Nederhof, A. (2006). Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the social sciences and humanities. Scientometrics, 66, 81-100.
7. Aksnes, D., & Sivertsen, G. (2009). A macro-study of scientific productivity and publication patterns across all scholarly disciplines. In Larsen & Leta (Eds.), 12th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics (pp. 394-398).
8. Todeschini, R. (2011). The j-index: a new bibliometric index and mulitvariate comparisons between other bibliometric indices. Scientometrics, 87, 621-639.
9. van Raan, A. (2005b). Measuring science: Capita selectaof current main issues. In H. Moed, W. Glenzel & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research (Vol. 19-50). New York: Springer.
10. Leydesdorff, L. (2008). Caveats for the use of citation indicators in research and journal evaluation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59, 278-287.
11. Mingers, J., & Burrell, Q. (2006). Modelling citation behavior in Management Science journals. Information Processing and Management, 42, 1451-1464.
12. Moed, H. F., Burger, W., Frankfort, J., & Van Raan, A. (1985). The use of bibliometric data for the measurement of university performance. Research Policy, 14, 131-149.
13. Leydesdorff, L., & Opthoft, T. (2011). Remaining problems with the "New Crown Indicator" (MNCS) of the CWTS. Journal of Informetrics, forthcoming.
14. Lundberg, J. (2007). Lifting the crown - citation z-score. Journal of Informetrics, 1, 145-154.
15. Opthof, T., & Leydesdorff, L. (2010). Caveats for the journal and field normalizations in the CWTS ("Leiden") evaluations of research performance. Journal of Informetrics, 4, 423-430.
16. Cambell, D., Archambaulte, E., & Cote, G. (2008). Benchmarking of Canadian Genomics: 1996-2007. In.
17. Rehn, C., & Kronman, U. (2008). Bibliometric handbook for Karolinska Institutet. In.
18. Van Veller, M., Gerritsma, W., Van der Togt, P., Leon, C., & Van Zeist, C. (2009). Bibliometric analyses on repository contents for the evaluation of research at Wageningen UR. In A. Katsirikou & C. Skiadas (Eds.), Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Libraries: Theory and Applications (pp. 19-26,): World Scientific.
19. Bornmann, L. (2010). Towards an ideal method of measuring research performance: Some comments to the Opthof and Leydesdorff (2010) paper. Journal of Informetrics, 4, 441-443.
20. Bornmann, L., & Mutz, R. (2011). Further steps towards an ideal method of measuring citation performance: The avoidance of citation (ratio) averages in field-normalization. Journal of Informetrics, 5, 228-230.
21. Moed, H. (2010). CWTS crown indicator measures citation impact of a research group's publication oeuvre. Journal of Informetrics, 4, 436-438.
22. van Raan, A., van Leeuwen, T., Visser, M., van Eck, N., & Waltman, L. (2011). Rivals for the crown: Reply to Opthof and Leydesdorff. Journal of Informetrics, 4, 431-435.
23. Waltman, L., van Eck, N., van Leeuwen, T., Visser, M., & van Raan, A. (2010). Towards a new crown indicator: Some theoretical considerations. Journal of Informetrics, 5, 37-47.
24. Waltman, L., van Eck, N., van Leeuwen, T., Visser, M., & van Raan, A. (2011). Towards a new crown indicator: an empirical analysis. Scientometrics, 1-15.
25. Meho, L., & Yang, K. (2007). Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar. Journal American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58, 2105-2125.
26. HEFCE. (2008). Counting what is measured or measuring what counts. In: HEFCE.
27. Mahdi, S., D'Este, P., & Neely, A. (2008). Citation counts: Are they good predictors of RAE scores? In. London: AIM Research.
28. Moed, H., & Visser, M. (2008). Appraisal of Citation Data Sources. In. Leiden: Centre for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University.
29. Mingers, J., & Lipitakis, L. (2010). Counting the citations: A comparison of Web of Science and Google Scholar in the field of management. Scientometrics, 85, 613-625.
30. Walters, W. (2007). Google Scholar coverage of a multidisciplinary field. Information Processing and Management, 43, 1121-1132.
31. van Raan, A. (2005). Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods. Scientometrics, 62, 133-143.
32. Abramo, G., & D'Angelo, C. (2011). Evaluating research: from informed peer review to bibliometric. Scientometrics, 87, 499-514.
33. Mingers, J. (2008). Exploring the dynamics of journal citations: modelling with S-curves. Journal Operational Research Society, 59, 1013-1025.