The Most Influential Researchers in iMetrics: A Compound Look at Influence Indicators

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 PhD in Knowledge and Information Science; Assistant Professor; Payame Noor University; Tehran, Iran

2 PhD in Knowledge and Information Science; Associated Professor; Payame Noor University; Tehran, Iran

3 PhD Candidate in Knowledge and Information Science; Payame Noor University; Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Purpose: Using both ideational and social influences’ indicators, this study tries to identify and analyze the most influential researchers in iMetrics. To do so, the researchers used a combination of H family indexes (h-index, g-index, and contemporary h-index) and co-authorship centralities (degree, betweenness, and closeness) for calculating ideational and social influences, respectively.
Methods: The study uses a bibliometric methodology and social network analysis approaches. The initial data of this study, which comprises 5944 records in the field of iMetrics during 1978-2014, have been retrieved from Web of Science. UCINet and BibExcel software have been used to calculate centrality measures and h-index; g-index and contemporary h-index have been measured manually within Excel. Once all measures have been calculated, researchers used SPSS and LISREL statistical software packages.
Findings: Findings indicated that there is a significant correlation between social influence indicators and researchers’ performance. Moreover, the results of LISREL uncovered a significant correlation between ideational indicators and social ones.
Conclusions: Based on the findings revealed in this study, it seems that using balanced and compound bibliometric indicators has the capability to provide a relatively fair and clear insight on researchers’ influence in a specific field. In this way, it is possible to create individual profiles for all of researchers in that field. So that the result could be used for important decisions such as tenure and promotion committees, granting research projects, and the like.

Keywords

References

آذری حمیدیان، شهیاد (1392). برونداد پژوهشی اعضای هیأت علمی دانشگاه علوم پزشکی گیلان بر اساس شاخص هرش و پارامتر m تا پایان سال 2012. مجلۀ دانشگاه علوم پزشکی گیلان، 22 (86): 12 - 23.
ابراهیمی، سعیده (1387). بررسی عملکرد مجلۀ بین‌المللی علم‌سنجی در سال‌های 1990 تا 2006. مطالعات ملی کتابداری و سازماندهی اطلاعات، 19 (3): 41 - 54.
اوزون، علی (1387). ارتباط آماری برخی شاخص‌های اساسی کتاب‌سنجی در پژوهش‌های علم‌سنجی. ترجمۀ فرشید دانش و مریم ریاضی‌پور. فصلنامۀ کتاب، 18 (3): 249 - 254.‎
جمالی مهمویی، حمید رضا (1390). ارزیابی پژوهش: رویکردها، شیوه‌ها، چالش‌ها. رهیافت، 49: 39 - 51.
جمالی مهمویی، حمید رضا؛ نیکزاد، مهسا؛ علی‌محمدی، داریوش (1389). روند پژوهش‌های علم‌سنجی و کتاب‌سنجی در ایران. اطلاع‌شناسی، 8 (3): 3 - 26.
حسن‌زاده، محمد؛ خدادوست، رضا؛ زندیان، فاطمه (1391). بررسی شاخص‌های هم‌تألیفی، مرکزیت و چاله‌های ساختاری پژوهشگران نانو فناوری ایران نمایه‌شده در نمایۀ استنادی علوم (1991 - 2011). پژوهشنامۀ پردازش و مدیریت اطلاعات، 28 (1): 223 - 250.
حمیدی، علی؛ اصنافی، امیر رضا؛ عصاره، فریده (1387). بررسی تحلیلی و ترسیم ساختار انتشارات علمی تولید‌شده در حوزه‌های کتاب‌سنجی، علم‌سنجی، اطلاع‌سنجی و وب‌سنجی در پایگاه وب علوم طی سال‌های 1990 تا 2005. کتابداری و اطلاع‌رسانی، 15 (4): 161 - 182.
سادات‌موسوی، علی (1394). تحلیل ساختار شبکه‌های اجتماعی هم‌نویسندگی پژوهشگران حوزۀ علوم و تکنولوژی هسته‌ای با استفاده از رویکرد شبکه‌های فردمحور و جمع‌محور. رسالۀ دکتری، گروه علم اطلاعات و دانش‌شناسی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد علوم و تحقیقات تهران.
سهیلی، فرامرز؛ عصاره، فریده (1391). جستاری بر ساختار شبکه‌های هم‌نویسندگی، کتاب ماه کلیات، 16 (3): 62 - 73.
سهیلی، فرامرز؛ شریف‌مقدم، هادی؛ موسوی‌چلک، افشین؛ خاصه، علی ‌اکبر (1394). ارزیابی پژوهش‌های آی‌ متریکس با استفاده از مدل نفوذ علمی. پژوهشنامۀ پردازش و مدیریت اطلاعات (زودآیند).
کلانتری، خلیل (1388). مدل‏سازی معادلات ساختاری در تحقیقات اجتماعی – اقتصادی. تهران: نشر فرهنگ صبا.
عرفان‌منش، محمد امین؛ روحانی، والا علی (1393). بررسی همبستگی میان شاخصه‌های اثرگذاری علمی و اجتماعی پژوهشگران، مطالعۀ موردی: حوزۀ علم‌سنجی. فصلنامۀ کتابداری و اطلاع‌رسانی، 16 (4): 145 - 171.
عصاره، فریده؛ برایرپور، رباب (1390). بررسی بروندادهای علمی حوزه‌های کتاب‌سنجی، علم‌سنجی و اطلاع‌سنجی در نمایۀ استنادی علوم اجتماعی به‌منظور یافتن تمایزها و شباهت‌های بین این سه حوزه. فصلنامۀ کتابداری و اطلاع‌رسانی، 14 (4): 141 - 162.
عمرانی، سید ابراهیم (1386). شاخص‌های جدید علم‌سنجی و مقایسۀ پایگاه‌های وبگاه علوم و اسکوپوس و گوگل اسکولار. رهیافت، 39: 47 - 55.
نوروزی چاکلی، عبدالرضا؛ آقایاری، حسین؛ حسن‌زاده، محمد (1390). ارزیابی پژوهشگران دانشگاه شهید بهشتی در پایگاه‌های استنادی وب آو ساینس، اسکوپوس و گوگل اسکالر بر اساس شاخص‌های اچ، جی، و پارامتر ام. پژوهشنامۀکتابداریواطلاع‌رسانی، 1 (1): 135 - 152.
References
Abramo, G. and D’Angelo, C.A. (2011) Evaluating research: from informed peer review to bibliometrics. Scientometrics, 87 (3): 499–514.
Abrizah, A.; Erfanmanesh, M.; Rohani, V. A.; Thelwall, M.; Levitt, J. M. and Didegah, F. (2014). Sixty-four years of informetrics research: Productivity, impact and collaboration. Scientometrics, 101 (1): 569-585.
Baldi, S. (1998). Normative versus Social Constructivist Processes in the Allocation of Citations: A Network-Analytic Model. American Sociological Review, 63 (6): 829–846.
Bharvi, D.; Garg, K. and Bali, A. (2003). Scientometrics of the international journal Scientometrics. Scientometrics, 56(1): 81-93.
Bornmann, L.; Mutz, R. and Daniel, H.D. (2008). Are There Better Indices for Evaluation Purposes than the h Index? A Comparison of Nine Different Variants of the h Index Using Data from Biomedicine. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(5): 830‐837.
Bornmann, L.; Mutz, R.; Hug, S.E. and Daniel, H.D. (2011). A multilevel meta-analysis of studies reporting correlations between the h index and 37 different h index variants. Journal of Informetrics, 5(3): 346–359.
Chen, C. (2013). Mapping scientific frontiers: The Quest for Knowledge Visualization, Second Edition. London, UK: Springer-Verlag.
Chen, Y.; Borner, K. and Fang, (2012). Evolving collaboration networks in Scientometrics in 1978–2010: A micro–macro analysis. Scientometrics, 95(3): 1051–1070.
Chirici, G. (2012) Assessing the scientific productivity of Italian forest researchers using the Web of Science, SCOPUS and SCIMAGO databases. iForest, 5(3): 101–107.
Diem, A. and Wolter, S. C. (2013). The use of bibliometrics to measure research performance in education sciences. Research In Higher Education, 54(1): 86-114.
Ding, J.; Liying, Y. and Qing, L. (2013). Measuring the academic impact of researchers by combined citation and collaboration impact. In 14th International Society of Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference (ISSI), Vienna, Austria, 15–19 July: 1177–1187.
Dutt, B.; Garg, K.C. and Bali, A. (2003). Scientometrics of the international journal scientometrics. Scientometrics, 56(1): 81–93.
Egghe, L. (2006). Theory and practice of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69 (1): 131–152.
Egghe, L.; Goovaerts, M. and Kretschmer, H. (2007). Collaboration and productivity: An investigation into ‘‘Scientometrics’’ journal and ‘‘UHasselt’’ repository. COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 1 (2): 33–40.
Eom, S. B. (Ed.). (2008). Author Co-citation Analysis: Quantitative Methods for Mapping the Intellectual Structure of an Academic Discipline: Quantitative Methods for Mapping the Intellectual Structure of an Academic Discipline. IGI Global.
Erfanmanesh, M.; Rohani, V.A. and Abrizah, A. (2012). Co-authorship network of scientometrics research collaboration. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, 17(3): 73-93.
 Freeman, L. C. (1979). Centrality in social networks: 1. conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1 (3): 215-239.
Glanzel, W. and Schubert, A. (2001). Double effort = double impact? A critical view at international co-authorship in chemistry. Scientometrics, 50(2): 199-214.
Harzing, A. W. (2010). The publish or perish book. Melbourne: Tarma Software Research.
Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46): 16569-16572.
Hou, H.; Kretschmer, H. and Liu, Z. (2008). The structure of scientific collaboration networks in Scientometrics. Scientometrics, 75(2): 189-202.
Hunter, P. R. (2009). Bibliometrics, research quality, and neglected tropical diseases. The Lancet, 373(9664): 630-631.
Jensen, P.; Rouquier, J.B. and Croissant, Y. (2009). Testing bibliometric indicators by their prediction of scientist’s promotions. Scientometrics, 78 (3): 467-479.
Leydesdorff, L.; Bornmann, L.; Marx, W. and Milojević, S. (2014). Referenced Publication Years Spectroscopy applied to iMetrics: Scientometrics, Journal of Informetrics, and a relevant subset of JASIST. Journal of Informetrics, 8(1): 162-174.
Lopez-Cozar, E. D.; Lorenzo-Sar, V.; Martin-Martin, A. and Millan, J. M. A. (2015). Classic Scholars' Profiles Bibliometrics & Scientometrics. Available at: http://www.classic-scholars-profiles.infoec3.es/bibliometrics/layout.php?id=home
Lopez-Cozar, E. D; Martin-Martin, A.; Orduna-Malea, E. and Millan, J. M. A. (2015). Scholar Mirrors: Bibliometrics, Scientometrics, Informetrics, Webometrics, and Altmetrics in Google Scholar Citations, ResearcherID, Researchgate, Mendeley, and Twitter. Available at: http://www.scholar-mirrors.infoec3.es/layout.php?id=home
Matcharashvili, T.; Tsveraidze, Z.; Sborshchikovi, A. and Matcharashvili, T. (2014). The Importance of Bibliometric Indicators for the Analysis of Research Performance in Georgia. Trames, 18 (4), 345-356.
McDonald, P.W.; Viehbeck, S; Robinson, S.J.; Leatherdale, S.T.; Nykiforuk, C.I. and Jolin, M.A. (2009). Building research capacity for evidence-informed tobacco control in Canada: a case description. Tob Induc Dis, 5(1): 12-19.
Meho, L. I. and Rogers, Y. (2008). Citation counting, citation ranking, and h-index of human-computer interaction researchers: a comparison of Scopus and Web of Science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(11): 1711-1726.
Milejeciv, S. and Leydesdorff, L. (2013). Information Metrics (iMetrics): a research specialty with a socio-cognitive identity? Scientometrics, 95(1): 141-157.
Mingers, J. (2009). Measuring the Research Contribution of Management Academics using the Hirsch Index. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 60(8): 1143-1153.
Mingers, J.; Macri, F. and Petrovici, D. (2012). Using the h-­‐index to measure the quality of journals in the field of Business and Management. Information Processing & Management, 48(2): 234‐241.
Mooghali, A.; Alijani, R.; Karami, N. and Khasseh, A. A. (2012). Scientometric analysis of the scientometric literature. International Journal of Information Science and Management, 9(1): 19-31.
Nederhof, A. J. and Erlings, C. M. (1993). A bibliometric study of productivity and impact of modern language and literature research in the Netherlands, 1982-1991. Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS), University of Leiden.
Rokach, L.; Kalech, M.; Blank, I. and Stern, R. (2011). Who is going to win the next association for the advancement of artificial intelligence fellowship award? Evaluating Researchers by mining bibliographic data. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62 (12): 2456-2470.
Rosenstreich, D. and Wooliscroft, B. (2009). Measuring the impact of accounting journals using Google Scholar and the g-index. The British Accounting Review, 41(4): 227-239.
Sahel, J. A. (2011). Quality versus quantity: assessing individual research performance. Science Translational Medicine, 3(84): 1-13.
Schoepflin, U. and Glänzel, W. (2001). Two decades of" Scientometrics". An interdisciplinary field represented by its leading journal. Scientometrics, 50(2): 301-312.
Sidiropoulos, A.; Katsaros, D. and Manolopoulos, Y. (2007). Generalized Hirsch h-index for disclosing latent facts in citation networks. Scientometrics, 72(2): 253-280.
Stidham, R. W.; Sauder, K. and Higgins, P. D. (2012). Using bibliometrics to advance your academic career. Gastroenterology, 143(3): 520-523.
Stringer, M. J. (2009). A complex systems approach to bibliometrics. Thesis (Ph.D.)--Northwestern University.
Takeda, H. (2011). Examining Scholarly Influence: A Study in Hirsch Metrics and Social Network Analysis. Ph.D Dissertation, Georgia State University, Atlanta.
Tess, B.H.; Furuie, S.S.; Castro, R.C.; BarretoMdo C. and Nobre M.R. (2009). Assessing the scientific research productivity of a Brazilian healthcare institution: a case study at the Heart Institute of Sao Paulo, Brazil. Clinics (Sao Paulo), 64 (6): 571–576.
Truex, D. P.; Cuellar, M. J.; Takeda, H. and Vidgen, R. (2011). The Scholarly Influence of Heinz Klein: Ideational and Social Measures of His Impact on IS Research and IS Scholars. EuropeanJournalofInformationSystems, 20(4): 422-439.
Valencia, M. (2004) International scientific productivity of selected universities in the Philippines. Science Diliman, 16 (1), 49–54.
Van Raan, A. F. (2000). The Pandora’s box of citation analysis: measuring scientific excellence, the last evil. The web of knowledge: A festschrift in honor of Eugene Garfield: 301-319.
Vidgen, R.; Cuellar, M.J.; Truex, D. and Takeda, H. (2016). The scholarly capital model: A proposal for the evaluation of scholarly research output. Journal of the Association for Information Systems (forthcoming).
Vinkler, P. (2015). Core indicators and professional recognition of scientometricians. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, (Early View).
Wang, F.; Qiu, J. and Yu, H. (2012). Research on the cross-citation relationship of core authors in scientometrics. Scientometrics, 91(3): 1011–1033.
Webster, N. R. (2011). Bibliometrics and assessing performance and worth. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 107(3): 306-307.
Weightman, A. L. and Butler, C. C. (2011). Using bibliometrics to define the quality of primary care research. British Medical Journal, 27 (3): 342-351.
Zyoud, S. E. H.; Al-Jabi, S. W.; Sweileh, W. M. and Awang, R. (2013). A bibliometric analysis of toxicology research productivity in Middle Eastern Arab countries during a 10-year period (2003-2012). Health Research Policy & Systems/BioMed Central, 12 (4), 4-13.
Zyoud, S. H.; Al-Jabi, S. W. AND Sweileh, W. M. (2014). Worldwide research productivity in the field of electronic cigarette: a bibliometric analysis. BMC Public Health, 14 (1), 667-674.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics