Sleeping Beauties in science

Raan, Anthony F. J. van

doi:10.1023/b:scie.0000018543.82441.f1

Cited by 471 publications

(321 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

298

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These are no more frequent than would be expected by chance, however, given the underlying distribution of citation patterns 17 . It is unlikely this affects many researchers and might be little different in effect from the outcomes of peer review on unnoticed work.…”

Section: The Timeframe For Bibliometric Analysismentioning

confidence: 81%

The use of bibliometrics to measure research quality in UK higher education institutions

Adams

2009

Arch. Immunol. Ther. Exp.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Timeframe For Bibliometric Analysismentioning

confidence: 81%

The use of bibliometrics to measure research quality in UK higher education institutions

Adams

2009

Arch. Immunol. Ther. Exp.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The extent of citation is commonly acknowledged to be an effective means of assessing the impact of a publication and the research associated with it and here the citation count of each paper is used as the measure of its quality. While uncited papers are generally regarded as having made less impact upon the scientific community that those which are cited, although some papers, socalled "sleeping beauties" (Van Raan, 2004) can remain unnoticed for a substantial period before making an impact, other highly cited papers may achieve their impact because they contain scientific error. In the research carried out here, a citation window of 5 years has been used, in order to ensure that significant number of citations has accumulated for each paper and that the longer term of the impacts of the papers that have been produced can be recognized.…”

Section: Establishing Indicators Of Quality Based On Citation Countmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing the scientific quality achieved by funding instruments for single grant holders and for collaborative networks within a research system: Some observations

Rigby

2008

Scientometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The working papers are produced by The University of Manchester -Manchester Business School and are to be circulated for discussion purposes only. Their contents should be considered to be preliminary. The papers are expected to be published in due course, in a revised form and should not be quoted without the authors' permission. Author(s) and affiliation AbstractIncreasingly, funding of academic research is carried out through the support of collaboration, rather than through single awards to a sole grant holder. The practice is well supported by evidence that larger, network-based research achieve high quality while leading to a number of capacity building benefits for the research system, although with significant transaction costs. However, the question of what kind of funding schemes should be made available to researchers is not a simple dichotomy between single grantholder projects and networks. A key question is how to achieve a balance in each subject field between different forms of funding instrument employed while ensuring different forms of funding retain a reputation for generating research of high scientific quality. This paper reports the results of a systematic comparison of the scientific quality of 1010 ISI scientific papers produced under two contrasting forms of funding instrument for a single year in the Austrian science system. Comparison of the arcsinh transformed citation counts of papers from the two main forms of funding for basic science at the level of main scientific field shows there is no statistically significant difference in the quality achieved by the two forms of funding. This may suggest that funders and research performers have deliberately ensured that different research instruments nevertheless achieve very similar levels of scientific excellence.

show abstract

“…These types of articlesdubbed 'sleeping beauties' by Van Raan (2004) -are a rarity. The study by Glänzel et al (2003) suggests for a large sample of science papers (450.000 articles) that the chance that a highly cited paper can be traced among the laggards is extremely small (0.00014 percent).…”

Section: Signaling In Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of course, besides looking into the separate effects of timing and impact we will also try to see what role signals play when you combine both these quality dimensions. By making a distinction between slow and fast recognition and high and low impact we shed light on the issue touched upon by Glänzel et al (2003) and Van Raan (2004) who show quite convincingly that publications that go unnoticed for a considerable number of years and then suddenly attract a lot of attention (so-called 'sleeping beauties') are extreme exceptions to the rule.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Signals in science - On the importance of signaling in gaining attention in science

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Abstract Which signals are important in gaining attention in science? For a group of 1,371 scientific articles published in 17 demography journals in the years 1990-1992 we track their influence and discern which signals are important in receiving citations. Three types of signals are examined: the author's reputation (as producer of the idea), the journal (as the broker of the idea), and the state of uncitedness (as an indication of the assessment by the scientific community of an idea). The empirical analysis points out that, first, the reputation of journals plays an overriding role in gaining attention in science. Second, in contrast to common wisdom, the state of uncitedness does not affect the future probability of being cited. And third, the reputation of a journal may help to ge t late recognition (so-called 'sleeping beauties') as well as generate so-called 'flash-in-the-pans': immediately noted articles but apparently not very influential in the long run. Terms of use: Documents in1

show abstract

Sleeping Beauties in science

Cited by 471 publications

References 3 publications

The use of bibliometrics to measure research quality in UK higher education institutions

The use of bibliometrics to measure research quality in UK higher education institutions

Comparing the scientific quality achieved by funding instruments for single grant holders and for collaborative networks within a research system: Some observations

Signals in science - On the importance of signaling in gaining attention in science

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About