Constructing experimental indicators for Open Access documents

The ongoing paradigm change in the scholarly publication system ('science is turning to e-science') makes it necessary to construct alternative evaluation criteria/metrics which appropriately take into account the unique characteristics of electronic publications and other research output in digital formats. Today, major parts of scholarly Open Access (OA) publications and the self-archiving area are not well covered in the traditional citation and indexing databases. The growing share and importance of freely accessible research output demands new approaches/metrics for measuring and for evaluating of these new types of scientific publications. In this paper we propose a simple quantitative method which establishes indicators by measuring the access/download pattern of OA documents and other web entities of a single web server. The experimental indicators (search engine, backlink and direct access indicator) are constructed based on standard local web usage data. This new type of web-based indicator is developed to model the specific demand for better study/evaluation of the accessibility, visibility and interlinking of open accessible documents. We conclude that e-science will need new stable e-indicators.Comment: 9 pages, 3 figure

Organic Livestock Production- A Bibliometric Review

Due to the increasing interest in organic farming, an overview of this research area is provided through a bibliometric analysis conducted between April and May 2019. A total of 320 documents were published up until 2018 on organic livestock farming, with an annual growth rate of 9.33% and a clear increase since 2005; 268 documents have been published in 111 journals. Germany is the country with the largest number of published papers (56 documents). Authors\u2019 top keywords (excluding keywords used for running the search) included: animal welfare (29 times), animal health (22 times), cattle (15 times), grazing (10 times), and sheep (10 times). This could indicate that more research has been done on cattle because of the importance of this species in Germany. Moreover, the prevalence of the terms \u2018animal welfare\u2019 and \u2018animal health\u2019 may indicate that the research on organic livestock production has been focused on these two areas. The bibliometric analysis indicates that: i) countries focused the organic livestock production research on their main production, and ii) more research in species other than cattle and sheep is needed

Stakes are higher, risk is lower: Citation distributions are more equal in high quality journals

Psychology is a discipline standing at the crossroads of hard and social sciences. Therefore it is especially interesting to study bibliometric characteristics of psychology journals. We also take two adjacent disciplines, neurosciences and sociology. One is closer to hard sciences, another is a social science. We study not the journal citedness itself (impact factor etc.) but the citation distribution across papers within journals. This is, so to say, "indicators of the second order" which measure the digression from the journal's average of the citations received by individual papers. As is shown, such information about journals may also help authors to correct their publication strategies.Comment: 9 pages, 4 figures. Published in STI 2018 Proceedings: https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/handle/1887/6522

Co-authorship networks in Swiss political research

Co-authorship is an important indicator of scientific collaboration. Co-authorship networks are composed of sub-communities, and researchers can gain visibility by connecting these insulated subgroups. This article presents a comprehensive co-authorship network analysis of Swiss political science. Three levels are addressed: disciplinary cohesion and structure at large, communities, and the integrative capacity of individual researchers. The results suggest that collaboration exists across geographical and language borders even though different regions focus on complementary publication strategies. The subfield of public policy and administration has the highest integrative capacity. Co-authorship is a function of several factors, most importantly being in the same subfield. At the individual level, the analysis identifies researchers who belong to the “inner circle” of Swiss political science and who link different communities. In contrast to previous research, the analysis is based on the full set of publications of all political researchers employed in Switzerland in 2013, including past publications