27,167 research outputs found
Using network centrality measures to improve national journal classification lists
Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators (STI 2016). València (Spain), September 14-16, 2016.In countries like Denmark and Spain classified journal lists are now being produced and used in the calculation of nationwide performance indicators. As a result, Danish and Spanish scholars are advised to contribute to journals of high 'authority' (as in the former) or those within a high class (as in the latter). This can create a few problems. The aim of this paper is to analyse the potential use of network centrality measures to identify possible mismatches of journal categories. It analysis the Danish National Authority List and the Spanish CIRC Classification. Based on a sample of Library and Information Science publications, it analyses centrality measures that can assess on the importance of journals to given fields, correcting mismatches in these classifications. We conclude by emphasising the use of these measures to better calibrate journal classifications as we observe a general bias in these lists towards older journals. Centrality measures can allow to identify periphery-to-core journals' transitions.Nicolás Robinson-GarcĂa is supported by a Juan de la Cierva-FormaciĂłn Fellowship granted by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness
The Evolution of Wikipedia's Norm Network
Social norms have traditionally been difficult to quantify. In any particular
society, their sheer number and complex interdependencies often limit a
system-level analysis. One exception is that of the network of norms that
sustain the online Wikipedia community. We study the fifteen-year evolution of
this network using the interconnected set of pages that establish, describe,
and interpret the community's norms. Despite Wikipedia's reputation for
\textit{ad hoc} governance, we find that its normative evolution is highly
conservative. The earliest users create norms that both dominate the network
and persist over time. These core norms govern both content and interpersonal
interactions using abstract principles such as neutrality, verifiability, and
assume good faith. As the network grows, norm neighborhoods decouple
topologically from each other, while increasing in semantic coherence. Taken
together, these results suggest that the evolution of Wikipedia's norm network
is akin to bureaucratic systems that predate the information age.Comment: 22 pages, 9 figures. Matches published version. Data available at
http://bit.ly/wiki_nor
A Systematic Identification and Analysis of Scientists on Twitter
Metrics derived from Twitter and other social media---often referred to as
altmetrics---are increasingly used to estimate the broader social impacts of
scholarship. Such efforts, however, may produce highly misleading results, as
the entities that participate in conversations about science on these platforms
are largely unknown. For instance, if altmetric activities are generated mainly
by scientists, does it really capture broader social impacts of science? Here
we present a systematic approach to identifying and analyzing scientists on
Twitter. Our method can identify scientists across many disciplines, without
relying on external bibliographic data, and be easily adapted to identify other
stakeholder groups in science. We investigate the demographics, sharing
behaviors, and interconnectivity of the identified scientists. We find that
Twitter has been employed by scholars across the disciplinary spectrum, with an
over-representation of social and computer and information scientists;
under-representation of mathematical, physical, and life scientists; and a
better representation of women compared to scholarly publishing. Analysis of
the sharing of URLs reveals a distinct imprint of scholarly sites, yet only a
small fraction of shared URLs are science-related. We find an assortative
mixing with respect to disciplines in the networks between scientists,
suggesting the maintenance of disciplinary walls in social media. Our work
contributes to the literature both methodologically and conceptually---we
provide new methods for disambiguating and identifying particular actors on
social media and describing the behaviors of scientists, thus providing
foundational information for the construction and use of indicators on the
basis of social media metrics
Characterizing Interdisciplinarity of Researchers and Research Topics Using Web Search Engines
Researchers' networks have been subject to active modeling and analysis.
Earlier literature mostly focused on citation or co-authorship networks
reconstructed from annotated scientific publication databases, which have
several limitations. Recently, general-purpose web search engines have also
been utilized to collect information about social networks. Here we
reconstructed, using web search engines, a network representing the relatedness
of researchers to their peers as well as to various research topics.
Relatedness between researchers and research topics was characterized by
visibility boost-increase of a researcher's visibility by focusing on a
particular topic. It was observed that researchers who had high visibility
boosts by the same research topic tended to be close to each other in their
network. We calculated correlations between visibility boosts by research
topics and researchers' interdisciplinarity at individual level (diversity of
topics related to the researcher) and at social level (his/her centrality in
the researchers' network). We found that visibility boosts by certain research
topics were positively correlated with researchers' individual-level
interdisciplinarity despite their negative correlations with the general
popularity of researchers. It was also found that visibility boosts by
network-related topics had positive correlations with researchers' social-level
interdisciplinarity. Research topics' correlations with researchers'
individual- and social-level interdisciplinarities were found to be nearly
independent from each other. These findings suggest that the notion of
"interdisciplinarity" of a researcher should be understood as a
multi-dimensional concept that should be evaluated using multiple assessment
means.Comment: 20 pages, 7 figures. Accepted for publication in PLoS On
Betweenness and Diversity in Journal Citation Networks as Measures of Interdisciplinarity -- A Tribute to Eugene Garfield --
Journals were central to Eugene Garfield's research interests. Among other
things, journals are considered as units of analysis for bibliographic
databases such as the Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus. In addition to
disciplinary classifications of journals, journal citation patterns span
networks across boundaries to variable extents. Using betweenness centrality
(BC) and diversity, we elaborate on the question of how to distinguish and rank
journals in terms of interdisciplinarity. Interdisciplinarity, however, is
difficult to operationalize in the absence of an operational definition of
disciplines, the diversity of a unit of analysis is sample-dependent. BC can be
considered as a measure of multi-disciplinarity. Diversity of co-citation in a
citing document has been considered as an indicator of knowledge integration,
but an author can also generate trans-disciplinary--that is,
non-disciplined--variation by citing sources from other disciplines. Diversity
in the bibliographic coupling among citing documents can analogously be
considered as diffusion of knowledge across disciplines. Because the citation
networks in the cited direction reflect both structure and variation, diversity
in this direction is perhaps the best available measure of interdisciplinarity
at the journal level. Furthermore, diversity is based on a summation and can
therefore be decomposed, differences among (sub)sets can be tested for
statistical significance. In an appendix, a general-purpose routine for
measuring diversity in networks is provided
- …