Blockchain and disruptive technologies in social sciences: Interdisciplinary perspectives

This special issue contains selected papers that cover a broad range of current trends and interdisciplinary approaches in the social research on Blockchain and disruptive technologies

Julie Hendon, Interim Associate Provost for Academic Technology Initiatives & Faculty Development and Dean of Social Sciences & Interdisciplinary Programs, Director of the Johnson Center for Creative Teaching and Learning, and Professor of Anthropology

In this new Next Page column, Julie Hendon shares how listening to audiobooks has made her more aware of writing quality, her top picks for archaeology-related fiction (hint: two series to add to your must-read list!), and which authors she returns to again and again

Large-Scale Analysis of the Accuracy of the Journal Classification Systems of Web of Science and Scopus

Journal classification systems play an important role in bibliometric analyses. The two most important bibliographic databases, Web of Science and Scopus, each provide a journal classification system. However, no study has systematically investigated the accuracy of these classification systems. To examine and compare the accuracy of journal classification systems, we define two criteria on the basis of direct citation relations between journals and categories. We use Criterion I to select journals that have weak connections with their assigned categories, and we use Criterion II to identify journals that are not assigned to categories with which they have strong connections. If a journal satisfies either of the two criteria, we conclude that its assignment to categories may be questionable. Accordingly, we identify all journals with questionable classifications in Web of Science and Scopus. Furthermore, we perform a more in-depth analysis for the field of Library and Information Science to assess whether our proposed criteria are appropriate and whether they yield meaningful results. It turns out that according to our citation-based criteria Web of Science performs significantly better than Scopus in terms of the accuracy of its journal classification system

The chequered career of a cryptic concept

Copyright @ 2006 The Autho

Publication Trends in Physics Education: A Bibliometric study

A publication trend in Physics Education by employing bibliometric analysis leads the researchers to describe current scientific movement. This paper tries to answer "What do Physics education scientists concentrate in their publications?" by analyzing the productivity and development of publications on the subject category of Physics Education in the period 1980--2013. The Web of Science databases in the research areas of "EDUCATION - EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH" was used to extract the publication trends. The study involves 1360 publications, including 840 articles, 503 proceedings paper, 22 reviews, 7 editorial material, 6 Book review, and one Biographical item. Number of publications with "Physical Education" in topic increased from 0.14 % (n = 2) in 1980 to 16.54 % (n = 225) in 2011. Total number of receiving citations is 8071, with approximately citations per papers of 5.93. The results show the publication and citations in Physic Education has increased dramatically while the Malaysian share is well ranked

Co-authoring in Social Sciences as a strategy for improving the visibility of scientific Works: increase in the number of citations (2005-2014)

Co-authorship is analyzed in WoS in the Social Sciences, Interdisciplinary category between 2005 and 2014, in order to demonstrate the hypothesis that there is a correlation between co-authorship and an increase in the number of citations. For this purpose, co-authorship has been analyzed both at the intrainstitutional, interinstitutional, national and international levels. It is observed how there is an increase in the citation of the works that have multi author relationships at both international and international level. The analysis and results have been made on a total of 1,105 documents relevant to our consultation, which is based on the fact that at least one author of the sea works of a Spanish institution

National Scientific Facilities and Their Science Impact on Non-Biomedical Research

H-index, proposed by Hirsch is a good indicator of the impact of a scientist's research. When evaluating departments, institutions or labs, the importance of h-index can be further enhanced when properly calibrated for size. Particularly acute is the issue of federally funded facilities whose number of actively publishing scientists frequently dwarfs that of academic departments. Recently Molinari and Molinari developed a methodology that shows the h-index has a universal growth rate for large numbers of papers, allowing for meaningful comparisons between institutions. An additional challenge when comparing large institutions is that fields have distinct internal cultures, with different typical rates of publication and citation; biology is more highly cited than physics, which is more highly cited than engineering. For this reason, this study has focused on the physical sciences, engineering, and technology, and has excluded bio-medical research. Comparisons between individual disciplines are reported here to provide contextual framework. Generally, it was found that the universal growth rate of Molinari and Molinari holds well across all the categories considered, testifying to the robustness of both their growth law and our results. The overall goal here is to set the highest standard of comparison for federal investment in science; comparisons are made with the nations preeminent private and public institutions. We find that many among the national facilities compare favorably in research impact with the nations leading universities.Comment: 22 pages, 7 figure