Citing for High Impact

The question of citation behavior has always intrigued scientists from various disciplines. While general citation patterns have been widely studied in the literature we develop the notion of citation projection graphs by investigating the citations among the publications that a given paper cites. We investigate how patterns of citations vary between various scientific disciplines and how such patterns reflect the scientific impact of the paper. We find that idiosyncratic citation patterns are characteristic for low impact papers; while narrow, discipline-focused citation patterns are common for medium impact papers. Our results show that crossing-community, or bridging citation patters are high risk and high reward since such patterns are characteristic for both low and high impact papers. Last, we observe that recently citation networks are trending toward more bridging and interdisciplinary forms.Comment: 10 pages, 6 figures, 1 tabl

Measuring academic research impact: creating a citation profile using the conceptual framework for implementation fidelity as a case study

The “citation score” remains the most commonly-used measure of academic impact, but is also viewed as practically and conceptually limited. The aim of this case study was to test the feasibility of creating a “citation profile” for a single, frequently-cited methods paper, the author’s own publication on the conceptual framework for implementation fidelity. This was a proof-of-concept study that involved an analysis of the citations of a single publication. This analysis involved identifying all citing publications and recording, not only how many times the key paper was cited within each citing publication, but also within which sections of that publication (e.g. Background, Methods, Results etc.). Level of impact could be categorised as high, moderate or low. The key paper had been cited more than 400 times and had a high impact in 25 % of publications based on citation frequency within publications, i.e. the key paper was cited three or more times; and a low impact in 58 % of citing publications, i.e. the key paper was cited just once. There were 41 “high impact” publications based on location of the citations, of which 35 (85 %) were also categorised as high impact by frequency. These results suggest that it is both possible and straightforward to categorise the level of impact of a key paper based on its “citation profile”, i.e., the frequency with which the paper is cited within citing publications, thus adding depth and value to the citation metric

On the relationship between interdisciplinarity and scientific impact

This paper analyzes the effect of interdisciplinarity on the scientific impact of individual papers. Using all the papers published in Web of Science in 2000, we define the degree of interdisciplinarity of a given paper as the percentage of its cited references made to journals of other disciplines. We show that, although for all disciplines combined there is no clear correlation between the level of interdisciplinarity of papers and their citation rates, there are nonetheless some disciplines in which a higher level of interdisciplinarity is related to a higher citation rates. For other disciplines, citations decline as interdisciplinarity grows. One characteristic is visible in all disciplines: highly disciplinary and highly interdisciplinary papers have a low scientific impact. This suggests that there might be an optimum of interdisciplinarity beyond which the research is too dispersed to find its niche and under which it is too mainstream to have high impact. Finally, the relationship between interdisciplinarity and scientific impact is highly determined by the citation characteristics of the disciplines involved: papers citing citation intensive disciplines are more likely to be cited by those disciplines and, hence, obtain higher citation scores than papers citing non citation intensive disciplines.Comment: 10 pages, 3 figures, 1 table. Forthcoming in JASIS

Minimum impact and immediacy of citations to physics open archives of arXiv.org: Science Citation Index based reports

The present work has calculated the minimum Open Archive Impact Factors and Open Archive Immediacy Index for the Physics Classes of arXiv.org as calculated for traditional journals in Journal Citation Reports of the Institute of Scientific Information using Science Citation Index without the citation by the classes itself. The calculated Impact Factors reveal that High-Energy Physics classes of arXiv.org (‘hep-th’, ‘hep-lat’, ‘hep-ex’, and ‘hep-ph’) have made more impact on the scientific community than any other classes except ‘nucl-ex’. The Impact Factors for the year 2003 are: ‘hep-th’ (0.999), ‘nucl-ex’ (0.806), ‘hep-lat’ (0.766), ‘hep-ex’ (0.73), ‘hep-ph’ (0.719), ‘nucl-th’ (0.338), ‘quant-ph’ (0.334), ‘cond-mat’ (0.313), ‘astro-ph’ (0.195), ‘math-ph’ (0.162), ‘physics’ (0.061), and ‘gr-qc’ (0.002). If the period for getting the citations to the open archive classes is considered one year as against two years for journal articles, the rank of the classes is the same. The immediacy of citing the Open Archives is also high for the High-Energy Physics classes. The Immediacy Indexes for the year 2003 are: ‘hep-ex’ (0.619), ‘hep-th’ (0.454), ‘hep-ph’ (0.44), ‘hep-lat’ (0.263), ‘nucl-ex’ (0.238), ‘quant-ph’ (0.202), ‘nucl-th’ (0.185), ‘cond-mat’ (0.168), ‘astro-ph’ (0.094), ‘math-ph’ (0.075), ‘physics’ (0.03), and ‘gr-qc’ (0.002). The impact is definitely much higher than what is concluded from the calculated factors because self-citations are not reckoned in the study. Use of web-tools like ‘Citebase’, ‘Citeseer’ etc. may strengthen the above argument

Solid phase synthesis of iron oxide from waste products

Iron oxide pigments, is one of the most common groups of inorganic pigments. Iron oxides are durable, economical, do not have a significant impact on the environment, safe for health. The need for iron oxide pigments today is quite high. When you are citing the document, use the following link http://essuir.sumdu.edu.ua/handle/123456789/3486

Do interdisciplinary research teams deliver higher gains to science?

The present paper takes its place in the stream of studies that analyze the effect of interdisciplinarity on the impact of research output. Unlike previous studies, in this study the interdisciplinarity of the publications is not inferred through their citing or cited references, but rather by identifying the authors' designated fields of research. For this we draw on the scientific classification of Italian academics, and their publications as indexed in the WoS over a five-year period (2004-2008). We divide the publications in three subsets on the basis the nature of co-authorship: those papers coauthored with academics from different fields, which show high intensity of inter-field collaboration ("specific" collaboration, occurring in 110 pairings of fields); those papers coauthored with academics who are simply from different "non-specific" fields; and finally co-authorships within a single field. We then compare the citations of the papers and the impact factor of the publishing journals between the three subsets. The results show significant differences, generally in favor of the interdisciplinary authorships, in only one third (or slightly more) of the cases. The analysis provides the value of the median differences for each pair of publication subsets

Depth and Breadth of Research Area Coverage and Its Impact on Publication Citation: An Analysis of Bibliometric Papers

Many other factors affecting citation of publications, except for research area coverage, have been studied. This study aims to investigate impact of research area coverage. Bibliometric papers and their related papers (referred papers, citing papers and first author's papers) were screened and matched by Python program. Papers' research areas were classified according to Web of Science. Bibliometric parameters of the most cited 5% and the least cited 5% papers were compared. Firstly, coverage of related papers' research areas impacts the citation of their original papers. The impact of references and citing papers are positive and negative, separately, while the first author's papers have no influence. Secondly, high-influence papers tend to cite references from a wider area and are cited by followers from a wider area. Additionally, the pattern of knowledge flow differs significantly between high- and low-influence papers. Low-influence papers narrow knowledge flow, whereas high-influence papers broaden it. This study has shown that both depth and breadth of research area coverage can influence citations. It is recommended that authors should extensively cite high-influence publications, both within and beyond their own area