134,360 research outputs found
Software tools for conducting bibliometric analysis in science: An up-to-date review
Bibliometrics has become an essential tool for assessing and analyzing the output of scientists, cooperation between
universities, the effect of state-owned science funding on national research and development performance and educational
efficiency, among other applications. Therefore, professionals and scientists need a range of theoretical and practical
tools to measure experimental data. This review aims to provide an up-to-date review of the various tools available
for conducting bibliometric and scientometric analyses, including the sources of data acquisition, performance analysis
and visualization tools. The included tools were divided into three categories: general bibliometric and performance
analysis, science mapping analysis, and libraries; a description of all of them is provided. A comparative analysis of the
database sources support, pre-processing capabilities, analysis and visualization options were also provided in order to
facilitate its understanding. Although there are numerous bibliometric databases to obtain data for bibliometric and
scientometric analysis, they have been developed for a different purpose. The number of exportable records is between
500 and 50,000 and the coverage of the different science fields is unequal in each database. Concerning the analyzed
tools, Bibliometrix contains the more extensive set of techniques and suitable for practitioners through Biblioshiny.
VOSviewer has a fantastic visualization and is capable of loading and exporting information from many sources. SciMAT
is the tool with a powerful pre-processing and export capability. In views of the variability of features, the users need to
decide the desired analysis output and chose the option that better fits into their aims
The Research Space: using the career paths of scholars to predict the evolution of the research output of individuals, institutions, and nations
In recent years scholars have built maps of science by connecting the
academic fields that cite each other, are cited together, or that cite a
similar literature. But since scholars cannot always publish in the fields they
cite, or that cite them, these science maps are only rough proxies for the
potential of a scholar, organization, or country, to enter a new academic
field. Here we use a large dataset of scholarly publications disambiguated at
the individual level to create a map of science-or research space-where links
connect pairs of fields based on the probability that an individual has
published in both of them. We find that the research space is a significantly
more accurate predictor of the fields that individuals and organizations will
enter in the future than citation based science maps. At the country level,
however, the research space and citations based science maps are equally
accurate. These findings show that data on career trajectories-the set of
fields that individuals have previously published in-provide more accurate
predictors of future research output for more focalized units-such as
individuals or organizations-than citation based science maps
A Comparison between Two Main Academic Literature Collections: Web of Science and Scopus Databases
Nowadays, the world’s scientific community has been publishing an enormous number of papers in different scientific fields. In such environment, it is essential to know which databases are equally efficient and objective for literature searches. It seems that two most extensive databases are Web of Science and Scopus. Besides searching the literature, these two databases used to rank journals in terms of their productivity and the total citations received to indicate the journals impact, prestige or influence. This article attempts to provide a comprehensive comparison of these databases to answer frequent questions which researchers ask, such as: How Web of Science and Scopus are different? In which aspects these two databases are similar? Or, if the researchers are forced to choose one of them, which one should they prefer? For answering these questions, these two databases will be compared based on their qualitative and quantitative characteristics
A Comparison between Two Main Academic Literature Collections: Web of Science and Scopus Databases
Nowadays, the world’s scientific community has been publishing an enormous number of papers in different scientific fields. In such environment, it is essential to know which databases are equally efficient and objective for literature searches. It seems that two most extensive databases are Web of Science and Scopus. Besides searching the literature, these two databases used to rank journals in terms of their productivity and the total citations received to indicate the journals impact, prestige or influence. This article attempts to provide a comprehensive comparison of these databases to answer frequent questions which researchers ask, such as: How Web of Science and Scopus are different? In which aspects these two databases are similar? Or, if the researchers are forced to choose one of them, which one should they prefer? For answering these questions, these two databases will be compared based on their qualitative and quantitative characteristics.Cite as:
Aghaei Chadegani, A., Salehi, H., Yunus, M. M., Farhadi, H., Fooladi, M., Farhadi, M., & Ale Ebrahim, N. (2013). A Comparison between Two Main Academic Literature Collections: Web of Science and Scopus Databases. Asian Social Science, 9(5), 18-26. doi: 10.5539/ass.v9n5p1
Untangling the Web of E-Research: Towards a Sociology of Online Knowledge
e-Research is a rapidly growing research area, both in terms of publications
and in terms of funding. In this article we argue that it is necessary to
reconceptualize the ways in which we seek to measure and understand e-Research
by developing a sociology of knowledge based on our understanding of how
science has been transformed historically and shifted into online forms. Next,
we report data which allows the examination of e-Research through a variety of
traces in order to begin to understand how the knowledge in the realm of
e-Research has been and is being constructed. These data indicate that
e-Research has had a variable impact in different fields of research. We argue
that only an overall account of the scale and scope of e-Research within and
between different fields makes it possible to identify the organizational
coherence and diffuseness of e-Research in terms of its socio-technical
networks, and thus to identify the contributions of e-Research to various
research fronts in the online production of knowledge
Benchmarking citation measures among the Australian education professoriate
Individual researchers and the organisations for which they work are interested in comparative measures of research performance for a variety of purposes. Such comparisons are facilitated by quantifiable measures that are easily obtained and offer convenience and a sense of objectivity. One popular measure is the Journal Impact Factor based on citation rates but it is a measure intended for journals rather than individuals. Moreover, educational research publications are not well represented in the databases most widely used for calculation of citation measures leading to doubts about the usefulness of such measures in education. Newer measures and data sources offer alternatives that provide wider representation of education research. However, research has shown that citation rates vary according to discipline and valid comparisons depend upon the availability of discipline specific benchmarks. This study sought to provide such benchmarks for Australian educational researchers based on analysis of citation measures obtained for the Australian education professoriate
- …