What factors determine citation counts of publications in chemistry besides their quality?

Bornmann, Lutz; Schier, Hermann; Marx, Werner; Daniel, Hans‐Dieter

doi:10.1016/j.joi.2011.08.004

Cited by 204 publications

(126 citation statements)

References 50 publications

(46 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

104

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The results are consistent with previous studies (Didegah & Thelwall, 2013;Bornmann, Schier, Marx, & Daniel, 2012;Haslam et al, 2008;Kostoff, 2007;Boyack & Klavans, 2005;Peters & van Raan, 1994).…”

Section: The Impact and The Number Of Referencessupporting

confidence: 93%

“…However, a few studies have found no correlation between more authors and increased citations (Bornmann, Schier, Marx, & Daniel, 2012;Haslam et al, 2008). These studies' findings are often not generalizable, however because they are limited to a single country (Sooryamoorthy, 2009), a single institution (Gazni & Didegah, 2010), a single field of study (Leimu & Koricheva, 2005a&b;Haslam et al, 2008) or a specific journal (Bornmann, Schier, Marx, & Daniel, 2012). Using correlation and regression tests, positive correlations between citation counts and the number of authors have been found (Gazni & Didegah, 2010;Sooryamoorthy, 2009;Leimu & Koricheva, 2005a&b;Haslam et al, 2008) but not the extent to which the number of authors contributes to increased citations.…”

Section: Research Collaborationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Research Collaborationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To measure the impact of references, the average number of citations to the cited references (Didegah & Thelwall, 2013), the total number of citations to the references (Boyack & Klavans, 2005) and the h-index of the cited references (Bornmann, Schier, Marx, & Daniel, 2012) have been examined.…”

Section: Reference Impactmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Which factors help authors produce the highest impact research? Collaboration, journal and document properties

Didegah

Thelwall

2013

Journal of Informetrics

259

172

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study assesses whether eleven factors associate with higher impact research: individual, institutional and international collaboration; journal and reference impacts; abstract readability; reference and keyword totals; paper, abstract and title lengths. Authors may have some control over these factors and hence this information may help them to conduct and publish higher impact research. These factors have been previously researched but with partially conflicting findings. A simultaneous assessment of these eleven factors for Biology & Biochemistry, Chemistry and Social Sciences used a single negative binomial-logit hurdle model estimating the percentage change in the mean citation counts per unit of increase or decrease in the predictor variables. The journal Impact Factor was found to significantly associate with increased citations in all three areas. The impact and the number of cited references and their average citation impact also significantly associate with higher article citation impact. Individual and international teamwork give a citation advantage in Biology & Biochemistry and Chemistry but inter-institutional teamwork is not important in any of the three subject areas. Abstract readability is also not significant or of no practical significance. Among the article size features, abstract length significantly associates with increased citations but the number of keywords, title length and paper length are insignificant or of no practical significance. In summary, at least some aspects of collaboration, journal and document properties significantly associate with higher citations. The results provide new and particularly strong statistical evidence that the authors should consider publishing in high impact journals, ensure that they do not omit relevant references, engage in the widest possible team working, when appropriate, and write extensive abstracts. A new finding is that whilst is seems to be useful to collaborate and to collaborate internationally, there seems to be no particular need to collaborate with other institutions within the same country. IntroductionDuring an academic career, scholars make numerous choices about the type of research to conduct, how to present their research, and where to submit it for publication. It seems logical that researchers should aim to conduct the highest possible impact research in order to make the most of their talents and opportunities. Whilst the key decisions for this aim are likely to be specific to the topics researched, there are some more peripheral factors that are nevertheless relevant and that academics may also need to consider in order to maximise the impact of their efforts.Citation counts are widely acknowledged as the main scientific research impact indicator and empirical studies have been carried out to seek associations between citation counts and various objective and easily measurable properties of research. These include the impact of the publishing journal (Boyack & Klavans, 2005), collaboration (Gazni & Didegah, 2010)...

show abstract

Section: The Impact and The Number Of Referencessupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Research Collaborationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Research Collaborationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Reference Impactmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Which factors help authors produce the highest impact research? Collaboration, journal and document properties

Didegah

Thelwall

2013

Journal of Informetrics

259

172

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The output in Other Topics presents different behaviors for all the indicators, and the trends are much more stable over the time period of study. Thus, differences in impact are apparently not determined solely by the geographic realm and the thematic scope of research, but are also affected by the language of publication, single authorship versus collaboration, and the profiles of the journals where published; these results are in line with previous findings (Bornmann, Schier, Marx, & Daniel, 2012;Chinchilla, López, & Moya, 2012b).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

What factors affect the visibility of Argentinean publications in humanities and social sciences in Scopus? Some evidence beyond the geographic realm of research

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Argentina´s patterns of publication in the humanities and social sciences were studied for the period 2003-2012, using the Scopus database and distinguishing the geographic realm of the research. The results indicate that "topics of national scope" have grown and gained international visibility. They can be broadly characterized as having Spanish as the language of publication, and a marked preference for single authorship; in contrast, the publication of "global topics", not geographically limited, characteristically have English as the language of divulgation, and institutional collaboration is stronger and more consolidated.Citation is apparently not determined only by the geographic realm of research, but also by language of publication, co-authorship, and the profiles of the journals where published. These results could contribute to constructive reflection upon publishing policy. The existence of a community of journals that tolerates biased patterns may make researchers echo and perpetuate poor practices, constructing or adapting the channels of communication. Such results also prove useful as a point of reference when evaluation criteria are elaborated by scientific committees, as unsupervised promotion and evaluation patterns could become Pre-print of: Scientometrics, DOI 10.1007/s11192-014-1414-4 2 based on local or overly subjective precepts, disregarding the disciplinary practices of the international scientific community.

show abstract

Translatability Analysis of National Institutes of Health–Funded Biomedical Research That Applies Artificial Intelligence

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Key Points Question Which applications of artificial intelligence (AI) in biomedical research could generate the most translational value (ie, ability to lead to development that has measurable value for human health)? Findings In this cohort study using bibliometric analysis, 2 citation-based metrics were used as proxies for translational impact, and 75 unique medical applications of AI were identified from a set of 16 629 National Institutes of Health awards related to AI, using natural language processing. Varied applications were found to have high translatability, but bias against applications in basic biochemical analysis was evident. Meaning These findings suggest that National Institutes of Health award data applications of AI in biomedical research are not equivalent: some demonstrate greater potential for translational impact than others.

show abstract

What factors determine citation counts of publications in chemistry besides their quality?

Cited by 204 publications

References 50 publications

Which factors help authors produce the highest impact research? Collaboration, journal and document properties

Which factors help authors produce the highest impact research? Collaboration, journal and document properties

What factors affect the visibility of Argentinean publications in humanities and social sciences in Scopus? Some evidence beyond the geographic realm of research

Translatability Analysis of National Institutes of Health–Funded Biomedical Research That Applies Artificial Intelligence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About