Influence of omitted citations on the bibliometric statistics of the major manufacturing journals

Scientometrics

Volumn 103, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 1083-1122

  Franceschini, Fiorenzo ^a   Maisano, Domenico ^a   Mastrogiacomo, Luca ^a  

^a POLITECNICO DI TORINO   (Italy)

Author keywords

Citation count; Confidence interval; CPP; Database error; Impact factor; Journal ranking; Manufacturing journal; Omitted citation rate

Indexed keywords

EID: 85027951329     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: 15882861     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-015-1583-9     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Adam, D. (2002). Citation analysis: The counting house. Nature, 415(6873), 726–729.
2. Arnold, D. N., & Fowler, K. K. (2011). Nefarious numbers. Notices of American Mathematical Society, 58(3), 434–437.
3. Bar-Ilan, J. (2010). Ranking of information and library science journals by JIF and by h-type indices. Journal of Informetrics, 4(2), 141–147.
4. Buchanan, R. A. (2006). Accuracy of cited references: The role of citation databases. College & Research Libraries, 67(4), 292–303.
5. DORA. (2013). San Francisco declaration on research assessment. http://am.ascb.org/dora/. 20 May 2014.
6. ERA. (2010). Excellence in research for Australia initiative. http://www.arc.gov.au/era/era_2010/era_2010.htm. 20 May 2014.
7. Falagas, M. E., Kouranos, V. D., Arencibia-Jorge, R., & Karageorgopoulos, D. E. (2008). Comparison of SCImago journal rank indicator with journal impact factor. The FASEB Journal, 22(8), 2623–2628.
8. Franceschini, F., & Maisano, D. (2011). Influence of database mistakes on journal citation analysis: remarks on the paper by Franceschini and Maisano, QREI (2010). Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 27(7), 969–976.
9. Franceschini, F., Maisano, D., & Mastrogiacomo, L. (2013). A novel approach for estimating the omittedcitation rate of bibliometric databases. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(10), 2149–2156.
10. Franceschini, F., Maisano, D., & Mastrogiacomo, L. (2014). Scientific Journal Publishers and Omitted Citations in Bibliometric Databases: Any Relationship? Journal of Informetrics, 8(3), 751–765.
11. Franceschini, F., Maisano, D., & Mastrogiacomo, L. (2015). Errors in DOI indexing by bibliometric databases. To appear in Scientometrics,. doi:10.1007/s11192-014-1503-4.
12. Hicks, D. (2009). Evolving regimes of multi-university research evaluation. Higher Education, 57, 393–404.
13. Jacsó, P. (2006). Deflated, inflated and phantom citation counts. Online Information Review, 30(3), 297–309.
14. Jacsó, P. (2012). Grim tales about the impact factor and the h-index in the Web of Science and the Journal Citation Reports databases: Reflections on Vanclay’s criticism. Scientometrics, 92(2), 325–354.
15. Labbé, C. (2010). Ike Antkare, one of the great stars in the scientific firmament. ISSI Newsletter, 6(2), 48–52.
16. Li, J., Burnham, J. F., Lemley, T., & Britton, R. M. (2010). Citation analysis: Comparison of Web of Science, Scopus, Scifinder, and Google Scholar. Journal of Electronic Resources in Medical Libraries, 7(3), 196–217.
17. Lowry, P. M., Humpherys, S. L., Malwitz, J., & Nix, J. (2007). A scientometric study of the perceived quality of business and technical communication journals. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 50(4), 352–378.
18. Meho, L. I., & Yang, K. (2007). Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of Science versus Scopus and Google Scholar. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(13), 2105–2125.
19. Moed, H. F. (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation. Information sciences and knowledge management: Vol. 9. Dordrecht: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3714-7. ISBN: 978-1-4020- 3713-9.
20. Moed, H. F. (2011). The source-normalized impact per paper (SNIP) is a valid and sophisticated indicator of journal citation impact. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(1), 211–213.
21. Neuhaus, C., & Daniel, H. D. (2008). Data sources for performing citation analysis: An overview. Journal of Documentation, 64(2), 193–210.
22. Olensky, M. (2013) Accuracy assessment for bibliographic data. Proceedings of the 13th international conference of the international society for scientometrics and informetrics (ISSI), Vol. 2, pp. 1850–1851, Vienna, Austria.
23. Ross, S. M. (2009). Introduction to probability and statistics for engineers and scientists. New York: Academic Press.
24. Rossner, M., Van Epps, H., & Hill, E. (2008). Irreproducible results—A response to Thomson Scientific. The Journal of general physiology, 131(2), 183–184.
25. Schenker, N., & Gentleman, J. F. (2001). On judging the significance of differences by examining the overlap between confidence intervals. The American Statistician, 55(3), 182–186.
26. Schubert, A., & Glänzel, W. (1983). Statistical reliability of comparisons based on the citation impact of scientific publications. Scientometrics, 5(1), 59–74.
27. Scopus Elsevier. (2015). Scopus content coverage. http://www.scopus.com. 20 May 2014.
28. Thomson Reuters. (2015). http://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/science/science:products/a-z/journal_citation_reports/. 20 May 2014.
29. Van Noorden, R. (2013) New record: 66 Journals banned for boosting impact factor with self-citations. Nature News Blog. http://blogs.nature.com/news/2013/06/new-record-66-journals-banned-forboosting-impact-factor-with-self-citations.html. 20 May 2014.
30. VQR. (2011). Italian quality research evaluation VQR 2004–2010. http://www.anvur.org/anvur/. 20 May 2014.
31. Zitt, M. (2010). Citing-side normalization of journal impact: A robust variant of the Audience Factor. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 392–406.