Citation Scores Research Articles

The use of co-nomination analysis in real-time evaluation of an R&D programme

This article describes the application of co-nomination analysis, a technique designed to map the structure of a research community. The technique was used as part of the evaluation of the UK national information technology programme, which sponsors collaborative research between firms and between firms and universities. Co-nomination networks are based upon responses to questionnaires which researchers are asked to nominate other researchers whose work is similar or relevant to their own. Researchers nominated in the same response are presumed to be linked, and where these links occur with multiple frequency, the likelihood of their being significant is increased. The article describes the extension of a network which had been previously identified and compares the citation scores of researchers identified in the networks. It is concluded that the networks represented were realistic and a useful input to the evaluation. Industrial and government researchers with low citation scores were in some cases central to the networks, suggesting that co-nomination is useful in areas where publication is restricted or considered less important. Further development of the technique is planed.

Subject field characteristic citation scores and scales for assessing research performance

The total publication output of a given subject field can be arranged into groups according to its citation distribution.Characteristic scores are defined independently of any preconceived rule or law. The scores were used to group papers into five categories of citedness. Comparative assessments of reserach performance can be based on these citation scores.

Programmatic Evaluation and Comparison Based on Standardized Citation Scores : IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management

Programmatic Evaluation and Comparison Based on Standardized Citation Scores : IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management

Historic papers in physics — The case of Hugo Martin Tetrode, 1895–1931

It appears from the foregoing discussion that the results of citation analysis can be interpreted, in the investigated case, as indicators for either the direct use which is made of a paper in research, or for the “visibility” of its author as a pioneer in a (sub)-discipline. In the last case the citation scores primarily reflect the dynamics of the relevant scientific discipline.

Evaluating research output through life work citation counts

The total number of citations to all previous publications (“the life work” has often been used to evaluate the research output of target units such as persons or departments. However, a study of a sample of Dutch full professors of sociology shows that simple counting of citations may lead to unreliable results. Dependent upon recency of publication period, large variations in rankings and citation scores were observed. Other pitfalls of using life work citation counts were discussed, as well as how to avoid them. For fine-tuned assessment of research output, longitudinal analysis seems to be called for.

Programmatic evaluation and comparison based on standardized citation scores

The evaluation of scientific and technological performance is a complex process requiring many sources of input and that must be carefully synthesized and interpreted. One measure of performance is the number of citations received by an individual's scientific publications or patents. A methodology is proposed for standardizing citation counts that allows them to be directly compared for individuals working in different time frames and in different subject areas. Standardized performance measures for individuals can be aggregated to study group performance or to compare performances across subgroups or entire programs. The use of citation-based indicators has the advantage of providing large-scale evaluations at relatively low cost.

Pattern A, achievement striving, and scientific merit: does pattern A help or hinder?

Clinical observations and recent theorizing offer two opposing predictions about the relationship between Pattern A and the merit of one's work: (a) Pattern A helps; (b) Pattern A hinders. To test these two possibilities, male members of the Society of Experimental Social Psychologists completed a measure of Pattern A behavior, and citation scores were derived for each man from the Social Science Index 1973-1975. Assuming that citations are a rough measure of meritorious work, the results revealed that Type A behavior by men is associated with superior scientific work. Thus, it is unlikely that Pattern A hinders meritorious work. Rather, it may help.

Student Evaluations, Research Productivity, and Eminence of College Faculty

The relationship of a professor's involvement in research to his classroom performance has been vigorously disputed for some time, but discussions of this problem have been largely polemical. This study determines empirically the relationship of these two dimensions of academic competence for a national sample of 16 colleges and universities. Two measures of the research role are used: (1) publication score, based upon a weighted summary of articles and books written over a 20 year period, and(b)a citation score (eminence), based upon the number of times a scholar's work was cited by others over a ten-year period. Since research activity does not seem to be closely related to classroom performance, several other factors which might influence classroom performance were also considered: there is a very small positive correlation (.08, N = 4646) between teaching rating and course level with more advanced courses receiving more favorable ratings. Enrollment or class size is curvilinearly related to teaching r...