average citation rates by field 2020

Handbook of bibliometric indicators: Quantitative tools for studying and evaluating research. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2018.mar.03. We emphasize the labelling we use for these two because there is potential confusion in the terms self citing and self cited, which have been used elsewhere. A FWCI of 1 is considered average, while a FWCI of greater than 1 is above average. The linear plot is of benefit because it allows ready interpretation and reference back to the original data values. Copyright: 2022 Brandt et al. Annalen der Physik,18(9), 607621. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221212. 2020, Vol. NSB, 2020, p. V-12, Fig. By contrast the calculation of a self-citation rate divides all citations to self by all citations received from self and others, and both accumulate over time. Bensman, S. J., Smolinsky, L. J., & Pudovkin, A. I. Social crowdsourcing tools such as Scholarometer have been proposed to address this need. Sugimoto, C. R., & Larivire, V. (2018). The patterns of self-citation rates suggest a very broad cultural consensus about the balance between building on ones own work and recognising the influence of others. Ioannidis, J. P. A. Baccini, A., De Nicolao, G., & Petrovich, E. (2019). Self-citation by researchers: Narcissism or an inevitable outcome of a cohesive and sustained research program? A review of studies on citing behavior. Self-citations as strategic response to the use of metrics for career decisions. (2016). Overall, our interest is in maximising our understanding of the data and the status of outliers, which comes through multiple perspectives, rather than with the technical rightness or wrongness of any specific visualisation. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-1716-2. 2004, 2006; Fowler and Aksnes 2007; Costas et al. Bonzi, S., & Snyder, H. W. (1991). Peroni, S., Ciancarini, P., Gangemi, A., Nuzzolese, A. G., Poggi, F., & Presutti V. (2019). baseline measure is the all-years citation rate, which is the citation rate for https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551511412027. [59][60] The latter model is even used as a predictive tool for determining the citations that might be obtained at any time of the lifetime of a corpus of publications. 2015; Galvez 2017; Hyland and Jiang 2018; Mishra et al. Cap Rates will be higher or lower for individual properties depending upon the size, class and location of the property within the MSA. Narin, F. (1976). Journal of Higher Education,81(3), 366393. [53] Their analysis identifies universal impact metrics, such as the field-normalized h-index. Quantity of citations for Covid-19 and non-Covid-19 articles with median and range values across all fields. We anticipate that JIFs will be affected in coming years which could change the landscape for how journal excellence is determined in the future. 2018); about 13% as a median, using co-author self-citation (Ioannidis et al. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. 2019). The ethos of science and its correlates: An empirical analysis of scientists endorsement of Mertonian norms. Averages are calculated by adding the citation counts of individual papers and dividing by the number of papers. Koler-Povh et al. Journal of Documentation,64(1), 4580. The negative effects of citing with a national orientation in terms of recognition: National and international citations in natural-sciences papers from Germany, the Netherlands, and UK. . Scientometrics,59(3), 281310. Citations, citation indicators, and research quality: An overview of basic concepts and theories. Seven myths in bibliometrics about facts and fiction in quantitative science studies. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.4929.1363. The difference between research influence and self-citation excess, $${\text{Threshold}} = \left[ {{\text{Q}}3} \right] + \left[ {\left( {{\text{Q}}3 - {\text{Q}}1} \right)*N} \right]$$, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03417-5, How hot are hot papers? We conduct our search using keywords Covid-19, coronavirus, and sars-cov-2 to locate publications with these words in the title. This appears to make the recognition of outlier values relatively straightforward. [30], In response to growing concerns over the inappropriate use of journal impact factors in evaluating scientific outputs and scientists themselves, Universit de Montral, Imperial College London, PLOS, eLife, EMBO Journal, The Royal Society, Nature and Science proposed citation distributions metrics as alternative to impact factors. The journal impact factor, the two-year average ratio of citations to articles published, is a measure of the importance of journals. Our impact metrics reflect the power of research that is open to all. Publishing elite turns against controversial metric", "Prestigious Science Journals Struggle to Reach Even Average Reliability", "Requiem for impact factors and high publication charges", "ASM Journals Eliminate Impact Factor Information from Journal Websites", "Universality of Citation Distributions for Academic Institutions and Journals", "A citation-based, author- and age-normalized, logarithmic index for evaluation of individual researchers independently of publication counts", "An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output", "Handling self-citations using Google Scholar", "Citation classics published in knowledge management journals. Science Studies,1(1), 9599. Merton later included humility in one description of the norms of scientific research (Merton 1957). We describe this graphical procedure for identifying exceptional self-citation rates but emphasize the necessity for expert interpretation of the citation profiles of specific individuals, particularly in fields with atypical self-citation patterns. A high rate of self-referencing may reflect research in a specialty area or convey a pattern of a cohesive and sustained research program (Cooke and Donaldson 2014). Total citations, or average citation count per article, can be reported for an individual author or researcher. It is evident that the modal self-reference share is around 57% and the modal self-citation count is less than 5%, but this will be shown to vary by field. From excessive journal self-cites to citation stacking: Analysis of journal self-citation kinetics in search for journals, which boost their scientometric indicators. Inclusion of these would undoubtedly have increased the volume of papers and affected the results, though the direction or magnitude of change is unclear. The following sample from a Percentiles The term percentile designates a citation threshold at or above that at which a fixed fraction of the papers fall. This certainly cautions against any simple test of inappropriate behaviour and confirms the need for informed scrutiny and interpretation. Meadows, A. J., & OConnor, J. G. (1971). For everything except humanities, those numbers are far from 90% but they are still high: One third of social science articles go uncited! Torres-Salinas, D., Robinson-Garcia, N., & Moed, H. F. (2019). A high level of self-citation may also reflect a certain insularity in terms of area of investigation, but what it does not signal is broad or community-wide influence (MacRoberts and MacRoberts 1989; van Raan 1998; Aksnes 2003; Glnzel et al. We found that there a significant correlation between the values for individual researchers. It is calculated by Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific,98(610), 13471348. impact of a paper in the same research field published in that year. Scopus is considered by many to be the primary competitor to the Web of Science database for citation analysis and journal ranking statistics.. 2006; Thijs and Glnzel 2006; Glnzel 2008) and others (Aksnes 2003; Hyland 2003; Fowler and Aksnes 2007; van Raan 2008; Costas et al. A baseline is the average performance of a global set of publications with the same subject area, document type and year. The following excerpt from a Citation Rates Average citation rates are calculated for each year of the 10-year period, based on accumulated citations from the year of publication to the most current bimonthly update. A citation rate is the average number of citations received by a group of papers published in one research field in a given year. However, their citation records are substantial enough not to be affected by small variations and they should be broadly representative of peer expectations about standards and good practice in publication and citation behaviour. Moravcsik, M. J., & Murugesan, P. (1975). Scientometrics,109(3), 19892005. Very importantly, however, the data here and in the Appendix show that in some fields, within the central normal range and below the statistical threshold, there can be a well-populated and unproblematic upper decile and even upper percentile. The following chart shows the differences between Citation Impact of various subject categories. Field weighted citation impact (FWCI) is calculated by dividing the total number of citations an article has received the year it was published and 3 complete calendar years after its publication by the average number of citations articles of the same field, publication type, and publication year are expected to receive within the same time period. by the total number of papers. Ranking of the top 10 most-cited journals in several 2020 CiteScore categories (released in 2021 by Scopus, Elsevier). In this paper we report our investigations as to whether there is a typical or normal range of self-citation for each of 21 discipline-based fields employed in Essential Science Indicators (ESI: these are listed in the Appendix Table1) and we describe a graphical test for significant outliers. Journal of Academic Ethics,6(1), 6778. volume123,pages 11191147 (2020)Cite this article. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.5090160305. Academic misconduct, misrepresentation and gaming: A reassessment. The IQR-related threshold tested in this analysis is highly conservative: it seeks to attach as many researcher portfolios as possible to the central range and to establish where the potentially most egregious outliers are located. 2006; Minasny et al. The highly cited papers were clustered by author, initially using an algorithmic approach. https://doi.org/10.4033/iee.2014.7.1.e. ), countries represented by the authors of the citing works, subject focus or discipline of the citing works. Citation frequency is highly skewed with many infrequently cited papers and relatively few highly cited papers. Glnzel, W., & Thijs, B. The negative binomial regression model is similar to the Poisson regression model (for count data) except that it performs better with data over-dispersion [13, 14]. A macro study of self-citation. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2330-1. Some results on function and quality of citations. Gender differences in synchronous and diachronous self-citations. Self-citations are somewhat lower than many fields but self-referencing is extremely low and often zero. 1.5 times the inter-quartile range as for box-plots) for each field. Minasny, B., Hartemink, A. E., & McBratney, A. Scientometrics,59(1), 6377. It is important to recognize that citation counts grow over eLIFE, 8, article number e45374. A higher rate of self-citation is expected for co-author than for strict author self-citation, and, in general, a rising rate of co-author self-citation is observed with the growth in average number of authors per paper over time (van Raan 1998; Aksnes 2003; Glnzel and Thijs 2004b). We measure and communicate a range of metrics, including Impact Factor, CiteScore, overall citation rate, aggregate views and downloads, and news and social media mentions. The continuous central range extends up to at least 30% self-citing: this is a rate well above most other fields. Self-citations at the meso and individual levels: Effects of different calculation methods. Through this selection process, over 6000 researchers were recognized: 3517 within the 21 ESI fields; and 2491 in the additional cross-field category created to recognize equivalent contributions across several fields. Engqvist, L., & Frommen, J. G. (2010). JIF is a commonly used surrogate to determine journal excellence and is calculated by dividing number of citations in the current year for articles published in the previous two years by total number of articles published in that journal during the previous two years [21]. Isis,79, 606623. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,54(3), 251259. ", "The use of journal impact factors and citation analysis in the evaluation of science", "The rate of growth in scientific publication and the decline in coverage provided by Science Citation Index", "Papers with shorter titles get more citations", "Protein measurement with the Folin phenol reagent", "Beat it, impact factor! The 2020 Journal Impact Factors,published in the 2021 Journal Citation Report, are based on citations in 2020 to articles published in 2018 and 2019. Gender variations in citation distribution in medicine are very small and due to self-citation and journal prestige. These outliers may be distinguished graphically by setting a threshold related to the inter-quartile range of the relevant dataset. The larger the minimum number of citations, the smaller the peer group. Following the 2021 release of the Web of Science Group's Journal Citation Report (JCR 2021) and Scopus' CiteScore, 46 of the journals published by Frontiers have a Journal Impact Factor and 57 journals have a CiteScore. New York, NY: Wiley. Core elements in the process of citing publications: Conceptual overview of the literature. Citation impact is a measure of how many times an academic journal article or book or author is cited by other articles, books or authors. Because of the skew in such a distribution, an issue arises concerning the application of standard tests for data outliers.

How To Send Matic To Metamask From Coinbase, Articles A