“There is nearly always a theme for the publication of global rankings. Often it is the rise of Asia, or parts of it. For a while it was the malign grasp of Brexit which was crushing the life out of British research or the resilience of American science in the face of the frenzied hostility of the great orange beast …” (more)
[University Ranking Watch, 13 June]
“Some highly cited academics seem to be heavy self-promoters – but researchers warn against policing self-citation. The world’s most-cited researchers, according to newly released data, are a curiously eclectic bunch …” (more)
[Richard Van Noorden and Dalmeet Singh Chawla, Nature, 19 August]
“The latest THE world rankings have just been announced. For most of the indicators there are few surprises. There are more universities from Japan in the rankings. Oxford is first, followed by Cambridge. The USA contributes the largest number of top universities. China rises steadily. India is as usual is a disappointment …” (more)
[University Ranking Watch, 1 October]
“‘Open citations now!’ So concludes a new open letter to publishers from researchers who support making scholarly citations freely available, in the interest of better citation analysis. Advocates of such efforts say that references are a pillar of scholarly work and that being able to understand how articles cite each other shouldn’t require an expensive subscription to a database …” (more)
[Colleen Flaherty, Times Higher Education, 11 December]
“Citation behaviors vary widely between and within STM and HSS; within particular disciplines citations can also play sharply different kinds of roles. The complexity of adducing scholarly significance from citation metrics is further increased as scholars may use citations differently from one publication to the next …” (more)
[Karin Wulf, The Scholarly Kitchen, 16 July]
“Scholars have been devoting more attention to older literature, a new study of the citation patterns in journal articles reveals …” (more)
[Phil Davis, The Scholarly Kitchen, 10 November]
“Publishing in a high-impact journal carries the implicit promise that the article will also be highly cited. But the proof of this logic remains unsubstantiated …” (more)
[Anne-Wil Harzing and Wilfred Mijnhardt, Impact of Social Sciences, 17 September]
“It is widely accepted that academic papers are rarely cited or even read. But what kind of data lies behind these assertions? Dahlia Remler takes a look at the academic research on citation practices and finds that whilst it is clear citation rates are low, much confusion remains over precise figures …” (more)
[Impact of Social Sciences, 23 April]
“The work of women researchers is worth about 80% of the work of their male colleagues. At least, that’s what you’d have to believe according to one standard measure of quality …” (more)
[Curt Rice, 19 October]
“Google Scholar, the academic bibliographic database provided free-of-charge by the search engine giant Google, has been suggested as an alternative or complementary resource to the commercial citation databases like Web of Knowledge (ISI/Thomson) or Scopus (Elsevier) …” (more)
[Ciaran Quinn, Research Support Librarian Blog, 13 September]
“… Surely it is now time for Thomson Reuters to stop counting self-citations for the Research Influence indicator in the THE World University Rankings …” (more)
[University Ranking Watch, 22 June]
“According to the 2013 edition of Thomson Reuters’ Journal Citation Reports, published on Wednesday, 37 journals have been added to the banned list this year for having ‘anomalous citation patterns’ …” (more)
[Paul Jump, Times Higher Education, 21 June]
“The Intellectual Property & Science business of Thomson Reuters, the world’s leading source of intelligent information for businesses and professionals, today announced a renewed four-year commitment between the Irish Universities Association and Thomson Reuters to demonstrate the efficiency and global impact of Ireland’s scientific research …” (more)
[Stockhouse, 7 May]
“Rankings of universities and of individual researchers use impact factors, citation analyses and increasingly the ‘h-index’ as ways to measure research impact. There are numerous articles questioning the validity of these measures, but as they do exist it is worth knowing what they are and how to measure for yourself …” (more)
[Aoife Geraghty, Read Around Research, 28 April]
