Send us a link

Subscribe to our newsletter

Normalization of Zero-Inflated Data: An Empirical Analysis of a New Indicator Family and Its Use with Altmetrics Data

Normalization of Zero-Inflated Data: An Empirical Analysis of a New Indicator Family and Its Use with Altmetrics Data

Proposing and testing a new indicator, the Mantel-Haenszel quotient.

Do Bibliometrics and Altmetrics Correlate With the Quality of Papers?

Do Bibliometrics and Altmetrics Correlate With the Quality of Papers?

A  large-scale empirical study based on F1000Prime, altmetrics, and citation  data.

Assessment of the Impact of Shared Data on the Scientific Literature

Assessment of the Impact of Shared Data on the Scientific Literature

This study demonstrates that openly shared data can increase the scale of scientific studies conducted by data contributors, and can recruit scientists from a broader range of disciplines.

Prevalence and Citation Advantage of Gold Open Access in the Subject Areas of the Scopus Database

Prevalence and Citation Advantage of Gold Open Access in the Subject Areas of the Scopus Database

No generalizable gold OA citation advantage at journal level.

A Bibliometric Model for Identifying Emerging Research Topics

A Bibliometric Model for Identifying Emerging Research Topics

A set of criteria for the identification of emerging topics is proposed according to the adjusted definition and attributes of emergence. 

TrueReview, A Platform for Post-Publication Peer Review

TrueReview, A Platform for Post-Publication Peer Review

We describe the mathematical foundations and structure of TrueReview, an open-source tool we propose to build in support of post-publication review.

A Scientists' View of Scientometrics: Not Everything That Counts Can Be Counted

A Scientists' View of Scientometrics: Not Everything That Counts Can Be Counted

A review showing that some metrics in widespread use cannot be used as reliable indicators research quality.

Connecting Collaborative Authoring to Peer Review

Connecting Collaborative Authoring to Peer Review

Building a coherent collaboration environment that facilitates scholarly communication workflows of social scientists in the roles of authors, reviewers, editors and readers.

Single versus Double Blind Reviewing

Single versus Double Blind Reviewing

The implications for conference program committees of adopting single-blind reviewing.

The Journal Impact Factor Should Not Be Discarded

The Journal Impact Factor Should Not Be Discarded

The Journal Impact Factor (JIF) has been heavily criticized over decades. This opinion piece argues that the JIF should not be demonized. It still can be employed for research evaluation purposes by carefully considering the context and academic environment.

How Many Scientific Papers Are Mentioned in Policy-Related Documents?

How Many Scientific Papers Are Mentioned in Policy-Related Documents?

An empirical investigation using Web of Science and Altmetric data investigates how many papers are mentioned in policy-related documents. We find that less than 0.5% of the papers published in different subject categories are mentioned at least once in policy-related documents. Based on our results, we recommend that the analysis of (WoS) publications with at least one policy-related mention is repeated regularly (annually). Mentions in policy-related documents should not be used for impact measurement until new policy-related sites are tracked.

Quantitative Evaluation of Gender Bias in Astronomical Publications from Citation Counts

Quantitative Evaluation of Gender Bias in Astronomical Publications from Citation Counts

The increase of the fraction of papers authored by women is slowest in the most prestigious journals.

Complementarities and ambivalences in the development and use of indicators

Complementarities and ambivalences in the development and use of indicators

The tension between simple but invalid indicators that are widely used and more sophisticated indicators that are not used or cannot be used in evaluation practices because they are not transparent for users, cannot be calculated, or are difficult to interpret.

Good Enough Practices in Scientific Computing

Good Enough Practices in Scientific Computing

We present a set of computing tools and techniques that every researcher can and should adopt. These recommendations synthesize inspiration from our own work, from the experiences of the thousands of people who have taken part in Software Carpentry and Data Carpentry workshops over the past six years, and from a variety of other guides. Unlike some other guides, our recommendations are aimed specifically at people who are new to research computing.

A Systematic Identification and Analysis of Scientists on Twitter

A Systematic Identification and Analysis of Scientists on Twitter

Metrics derived from Twitter and other social media 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.

How Scientific Success in Physics Depends on Network Positions

How Scientific Success in Physics Depends on Network Positions

Utilizing 250,000 papers from ArXiv.org we construct large coauthorship networks to investigate how individual network positions influence scientific success. Surprisingly, inter(sub)disciplinary collaborations decrease the probability of getting a paper published in specialized journals for almost all positions.

Gender Representation on Journal Editorial Boards in the Mathematical Sciences

Gender Representation on Journal Editorial Boards in the Mathematical Sciences

Women are known to comprise approximately 15% of tenure-stream faculty positions in doctoral-granting mathematical sciences departments in the United States. Compared to this pool, the likely source of journal editorships, we find that 8.9% of the 13067 editorships in our study are held by women.

The Natural Selection of Bad Science

The Natural Selection of Bad Science

The persistence of poor methods results partly from incentives that favor them, leading to the natural selection of bad science. This dynamic requires no conscious strategizing - no deliberate cheating nor loafing - by scientists, only that publication is a principle factor for career advancement.

Comparing Published Scientific Journal Articles to Their Pre-print Versions

Comparing Published Scientific Journal Articles to Their Pre-print Versions

An analysis reveals that the text contents of the scientific papers generally change very little from their pre-print to final published versions.

Top Tips to Make Your Research Irreproducible

Top Tips to Make Your Research Irreproducible

It is an unfortunate convention of science that research should pretend to be reproducible; our top tips will help you mitigate this fussy conventionality, enabling you to enthusiastically showcase your irreproducible work.