The influence of online posting dates on the bibliometric indicators of scientific articles

This article analyses the difference in timing between the online availability of articles and their corresponding print publication and how it affects two bibliometric indicators: Journal Impact Factor (JIF) and Immediacy Index. This research examined 18,526 articles, the complete collection of articles and reviews published by a set of 61 journals on Urology and Nephrology in 2013 and 2014. The findings suggest that Advance Online Publication (AOP) accelerates the citation of articles and affects the JIF and Immediacy Index values. Regarding the JIF values, the comparison between journals with or without AOP showed statistically significant differences (P=0.001, Mann-Whitney U test). The Spearman's correlation between the JIF and the median online-to-print publication delay was not statistically significant. As to the Immediacy Index, a significant Spearman's correlation (rs=0.280, P=0.029) was found regarding the median online-to-print publication delays for journals published in 2014, although no statistically significant correlation was found for those published in 2013. Most journals examined (n=52 out of 61) published their articles in AOP. The analysis also showed different publisher practices: eight journals did not include the online posting dates in the full-text and nine journals published articles showing two different online posting dates--the date provided on the journal website and another provided by Elsevier's Science Direct. These practices suggest the need for transparency and standardization of the AOP dates of scientific articles for calculating bibliometric indicators for journals

Supporting the Research Feedback Loop - Why and how library and information professionals should engage with altmetrics to support research

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to explore the opportunities altmetrics offer to library and information professionals as part of their research support provision. This paper examines what altmetrics are and how they can offer another useful metric to help academics engage with a variety of interested parties over the web. Design/methodology/approach: The paper considers the emergence of altmetrics as a research measurement and scholarly communication tool and the impact on academic libraries. Identifies existing metrics and explores their shortcomings as well as how these can be bridged by altmetrics. Findings: Altmetrics offer a wealth of opportunities for library and information professionals to make better strategic decisions, explore their own institution’s research output and provide scholarly communications intelligence to their research community. Originality/value: The value in this paper lies in encouraging academic librarians and information professionals to explore altmetrics for themselves and align any new knowledge with existing services and skills, in particular around metrics and digital media

Case-Based Comparison of Career Trajectories

Abstract. Data generated across time may not be easily comparable in its original form thus potentially leading to results that may be perceived as unfair to some. We investigate quality assessment of scholarly researchers from their curricula vitae (CVs) for processes such as hiring, promotion, and grant funding. In previous work, we demonstrated that case-based reasoning (CBR) offers advantages as a transparent methodology to assess researcher quality. Its benefits include consistency, transparency, ability to adapt to specific purposes, and ability to provide explanation. The problem we now face is how to preprocess the data from the CVs to compare researchers whose scholarly production is achieved under different conditions, different points in time, and span different career trajectory lengths. We propose strategies to deal with these aspects of time during preprocessing of the data for case representation. We use 1,000 CVs from the Brazilian Lattes database to illustrate

Metrics for an increasingly complicated information ecosystem

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to encourage recognition of the potential impact of an increasingly complicated information ecosystem on scientometric indicators. Design/methodology/approach – The paper considers how new web technologies have impacted the role of time in scientometric indicators. Findings – The paper suggests that it is important to be aware of the limitations of scientometrics indicators in an increasingly complicated information environment, although without a more developed semantic web there is little that can be done. Practical implications – Users of scientometric indicators should refrain from claiming too much confidence in them. Originality/value – The paper considers scientometric indicators at a finer granularity that usual, and will be of interest to anyone concerned the application of bibliometric indicators and the changing nature of scientific discourse. </jats:sec