Towards field-adjusted production: Estimating research productivity from a zero-truncated distribution

Journal of Informetrics

Volumn 10, Issue 4, 2016, Pages 1143-1152

  Koski, Timo ^a   Sandström, Erik ^b   Sandström, Ulf ^a  

^a ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

^b Doktorsvägen 43   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Field adjusted production; Research productivity; Size dependent indicators; Waring distribution

Indexed keywords

ESTIMATION; INFORMATION SERVICES;

BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATABASE; PERFORMANCE INDICATORS; PRODUCTION VALUE; REFERENCE VALUES; RESEARCH PRODUCTIVITY; SIZE DEPENDENT; TRUNCATED DISTRIBUTIONS; WARING DISTRIBUTION;

PRODUCTIVITY;

EID: 84992025500     PISSN: 17511577     EISSN: 18755879     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2016.09.002     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Abramo, G., D'Angelo, C.A., How do you define and measure research productivity?. Scientometrics 101 (2014), 1129–1144.
2. Abramo, G., D'Angelo, C.A., A farewell to the MNCS and like size-independent indicators. Journal of Informetrics 10:2 (2016), 646–651.
3. Abramo, G., D'Angelo, C.A., Di Costa, F., Research productivity: Are higher academic ranks more productive than lower ones?. Scientometrics 88:3 (2011), 915–928.
4. Bernardo, J.M., Smith, A.F.M., Bayesian theory. 1993, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester.
5. Braun, T., Glänzel, W., Schubert, A., Publication productivity: From frequency distributions to scientometric indicators. Journal of Information Science 16 (1990), 37––44.
6. Braun, T., Glänzel, W., Schubert, A., Publication and co-operation patterns of the authors of neuroscience journals. Scientometrics 51:3 (2001), 499–510.
7. Burrell, Q.L., Sample-size dependence or time-dependence of statistical measures in informetrics?. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 55:2 (2004), 183–184.
8. CWTS (2011–2015): Leiden ranking < http://www.leidenranking.com/> last accessed 2016-02-17.
9. Caron, E., van Eck, N.J., Large scale author name disambiguation using rule-based scoring and clustering. Proceedings of the science and technology indicators conference, September 3–5, 2014 Leiden, The Netherlands, 2014, 79–86.
10. Chen, W.-C., On the weak form of Zipf's law. Journal of Applied Probability 17 (1980), 611–622.
11. Davison, A.C., Hinkley, D.V., Bootstrap methods and their applications. 1997, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
12. Dimaki, C., Xekalaki, E., Towards a unification of certain characterizations by conditional expectations. Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics 48 (1996), 157–168.
13. Egghe, L., The power of power laws and an interpretation of Lotkaian informetric systems as self-similar fractals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 56:7 (2005), 669–675.
14. Glänzel, W., Schubert, A., A dynamic look at a class of skew distributions. A model with scientometric applications. Scientometrics 6 (1984), 149–167.
15. Glänzel, W., Schubert, A., Predictive aspects of a stochastic model for citation processes. Information Processing & Management 3 (1995), 169–180.
16. Glänzel, W., Telcs, A., Schubert, A., Characterization by truncated moments and its application to Pearson type systems. Zeitschrift für Wahrscheinlichkeitstheorie und verwandte Gebiete 66 (1984), 173–183.
17. Gurney, T., Horlings, E., van den Besselaar, P., Author disambiguation using multi-aspect similarity indicators. Scientometrics 91:2 (2012), 435–449.
18. Hicks, D., Performance-based university research funding systems. Research Policy 41 (2012), 251–261.
19. Irwin, J.O., On the estimation of the mean of a Poisson distribution from a sample with the zero class missing. Biometrics 15 (1959), 324–326.
20. Irwin, J.O., The place of mathematics in medical and biological statistics. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General) 126 (1963), 1–45.
21. Kendall, M.G., The bibliography of operational research. Operational Research Quarterly 11 (1960), 31–36.
22. Koski, T., Sandström, E., Sandström, U., Estimating research productivity from a zero-truncated distribution. Paper to the 2011 ISSI conference in durban, 2011.
23. Leydesdorff, L., Wagner, C., Macro-level indicators of the relations between research funding and research output. Journal of Informetrics 3 (2009), 353–362.
24. McKendrick, A.G.M., Applications to mathematics in medical problems. Proceedings of edinburgh mathematical society 44 (1926), 98–130.
25. Meng, X.L., The EM algorithm and medical studies: A historical link. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 6 (1997), 3–23.
26. Mongeon, P., Paul-Hus, A., The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics 106:1 (2016), 213–228.
27. Narin, F., Hamilton, K.S., Bibliometric performance measures. Scientometrics 36:3 (1996), 293–310.
28. OECD (2010): Performance-based funding of public research in tertiary education institutions. Report.
29. Reed, W.J., Hughes, B.D., On the size distribution of live genera. Journal of Theoretical Biology 217 (2002), 125–135.
30. Reed, W.J., Hughes, B.D., From gene families and genera to incomes and internet file sizes: Why power laws are so common in nature. Physical Review E 66 (2002), 67–103.
31. Sandström, E., Sandström, U. (2007): Modell för beräkning av direktanslag till svenska lärosäten baserad på forskningsproduktion och citeringsgrad. Bilaga 8 till SOU 2007:81 Resurser för kvalitet, pp. 389–443. [In Swedish].
32. Sandström, U., Sandström, E., (2007): A metric for academic performance applied to Australian Universities 2001–2004. E-prints in Library and Information Science < http://eprints.rclis.org>.
33. Sandström, U., Sandström, E. (2008): Resources for citations (in Swedish: Resurser för citeringar). Stockholm : National Board for Higher Education, Report 2008:18R.
34. Sandström, U., Sandström, E., The field factor: Towards a metric for academic institutions. Research Evaluation 18:3 (2009), 243–250.
35. Schubert, A., Braun, T., Three scientometric etudes on developing countries as a tribute to Michael Moravcsik. Scientometrics 23:1 (1992), 3–19.
36. Simon, H.A., On a class of skew distribution functions. Biometrika 42:3/4 (1955), 425–440.
37. Soler, J.M., Separating the articles of authors with the same name. Scientometrics 72:2 (2007), 281–290.
38. Telcs, A., Schubert, A., Publication Potential: An indicator of scientific strength for cross-national comparison. Scientometrics 9:5–6 (1986), 231–238.
39. Telcs, A., Glänzel, W., Schubert, A., Characterization and statistical test using truncated expectations for a class of skew distributions. Mathematical Social Sciences 10:2 (1985), 169–178.
40. Waltman, L., van Eck, N.J., Field-normalized citation impact indictors and the choice of an appropriate counting method. Journal of Informetrics 9 (2015), 872–894.
41. Yule, G.U., A mathematical theory of evolution, based on the conclusions of Dr. J.C. Willis, F.R.S. Philosophical Transactions Royal Society B 213 (1925), 431–444.
42. Zhang, L., Glänzel, W., Liang, L.M., Tracing the role of individual journals in a cross-citation network based on different indicators. Scientometrics 81:3 (2009), 821–838.