Coercive Citation... article from Science Magazine

Posted by Celia Walter | 22 Mar, 2012

Coercive Citation in Academic Publishing

Allen W. Wilhite*,,
Eric A. Fong
*

+ Author Affiliations

  1. College of Business Administration, University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, AL 35899, USA.
  1. Author for correspondence. E-mail: wilhitea@uah.edu

Despite their shortcomings (14), impact factors continue to be a primary means by which academics “quantify the quality of science” (5). One side effect of impact factors is the incentive they create for editors to coerce authors to add citations to their journal. Coercive self-citation does not refer to the normal citation directions, given during a peer-review process, meant to improve a paper. Coercive self-citation refers to requests that (i) give no indication that the manuscript was lacking in attribution; (ii) make no suggestion as to specific articles, authors, or a body of work requiring review; and (iii) only guide authors to add citations from the editor's journal. This quote from an editor as a condition for publication highlights the problem: “you cite Leukemia [once in 42 references]. Consequently, we kindly ask you to add references of articles published in Leukemia to your present article” (6). Gentler language may be used, but the message is clear: Add citations or risk rejection.

  • * Authors contributed equally to this work.

 
 

altmetrics

Posted by Celia Walter | 30 Jan, 2012

the creation and study of new metrics based on the Social Web for analyzing, and informing scholarship.

altmetrics.org/
   Our vision is summarized in:J. Priem, D. Taraborelli, P. Groth, C. Neylon (2010), Alt-metrics: A manifesto, (v.1.0), 26 October 2010. http://altmetrics.org/manifesto.You can follow the ongoing discussion on Twitter via the #altmetrics tag or via the respective groups on Mendeley or FriendFeed. [See also: Scholars Seek Better Ways to Track Impact Online, Chronicle of Higher Education.

Resources
altmetrics on Mendeley

altmetrics on FriendFeed

altmetrics on LinkedIn

Tools

Total-Impact
ReaderMeter

Altmetric.com
Altmetrics crawler

CitedIn

ScienceCard

PeerEvaluation.org

 
Mike Thelwall, University of Wolverhampton: “Evaluating online evidence of research impact” [Keynote speech ataltmetrics11: Tracking scholarly impact on the social Web, Koblenz (Germany), 14-15 June 2011  An ACM Web Science Conference 2011 Workshop]
 
Thanks to my colleague, Ingrid Thomson, for bringing this to my attention.

Scholarometer, a social tool to facilitate citation analysis

Posted by Celia Walter | 7 Dec, 2010

 

Scholarometer(beta) is ,  and help evaluate the impact of an author's publications.

HOW IT WORKS

 

http://scholarometer.indiana.edu/

“An Easy Way to Boost a Paper’s Citations”

Posted by Celia Walter | 17 Aug, 2010

Research Article: “An Easy Way to Boost a Paper’s Citations”

August 15th, 2010

From a Science Article:

A long reference list at the end of a research paper may be the key to ensuring that it is well cited, according to an analysis of 100 years’ worth of papers published in the journal Science.

The research suggests that scientists who reference the work of their peers are more likely to find their own work referenced in turn, and the effect is on the rise, with a single extra reference in an article now producing, on average, a whole additional citation for the referencing paper.

“There is a ridiculously strong relationship between the number of citations a paper receives and its number of references,” Gregory Webster, the psychologist at the University of Florida in Gainesville who conducted the research, told Nature. “If you want to get more cited, the answer could be to cite more people.”

Access the Complete Science Article

via Resourceshelf

New metrics of scholarly impact on the social Web

Posted by Celia Walter | 9 Jul, 2010

+ Scientometrics 2.0: New metrics of scholarly impact on the social Web
by Jason Priem, Bradely H. Hemminger

From the Abstract:

The growing flood of scholarly literature is exposing the weaknesses of current, citation-based methods of evaluating and filtering articles. A novel and promising approach is to examine the use and citation of articles in a new forum: Web 2.0 services like social bookmarking and microblogging. Metrics based on this data could build a “Scientometics 2.0,” supporting richer and more timely pictures of articles’ impact. This paper develops the most comprehensive list of these services to date, assessing the potential value and availability of data from each. We also suggest the next steps toward building and validating metrics drawn from the social Web.


Source: First Monday