关联自引和传播运气:引文计数的两个问题

IF 1.2 4区 管理学 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
K. Klika
{"title":"关联自引和传播运气:引文计数的两个问题","authors":"K. Klika","doi":"10.3138/jsp.51.4.10","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:There is considerable merit in discounting self-citations when measuring the worth of a paper, a journal, or an author bibliometrically. However, excluding self-citations from the citation count for a paper or a researcher does not completely solve the problem of how to properly measure the interest generated by a paper or a researcher because other deficiencies in citation counts remain. One of these is associated self-citation. This occurs when a subset of the authors who published one paper go on to publish another paper in which they cite the previous one; any authors of the first paper whose names are not on the second paper receive a full citation credit (called here an associated self-citation), but the repeated authors do not because they are disqualified by self-citation. Associated self-citations, in which unrepeated authors receive citation credit, can skew a measure of bibliometric worth, but it is a deficiency that can be redressed. Additionally, there is propagation luck—where a paper becomes the reference to cite when there are other comparable and worthy candidates—which is a problem that can be only partially addressed. In this paper, the author analyzes these deficiencies with an example that compares the bibliometric success of two articles of which he was a co-author.","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":"152 1","pages":"299 - 308"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Associated Self-Citations and Propagation Luck: Two Problems with Citation Counts\",\"authors\":\"K. Klika\",\"doi\":\"10.3138/jsp.51.4.10\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:There is considerable merit in discounting self-citations when measuring the worth of a paper, a journal, or an author bibliometrically. However, excluding self-citations from the citation count for a paper or a researcher does not completely solve the problem of how to properly measure the interest generated by a paper or a researcher because other deficiencies in citation counts remain. One of these is associated self-citation. This occurs when a subset of the authors who published one paper go on to publish another paper in which they cite the previous one; any authors of the first paper whose names are not on the second paper receive a full citation credit (called here an associated self-citation), but the repeated authors do not because they are disqualified by self-citation. Associated self-citations, in which unrepeated authors receive citation credit, can skew a measure of bibliometric worth, but it is a deficiency that can be redressed. Additionally, there is propagation luck—where a paper becomes the reference to cite when there are other comparable and worthy candidates—which is a problem that can be only partially addressed. In this paper, the author analyzes these deficiencies with an example that compares the bibliometric success of two articles of which he was a co-author.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44613,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Scholarly Publishing\",\"volume\":\"152 1\",\"pages\":\"299 - 308\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Scholarly Publishing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp.51.4.10\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp.51.4.10","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要:从文献计量学的角度来衡量一篇论文、一份期刊或一位作者的价值时,不考虑自引有相当大的价值。然而,将自引排除在论文或研究人员的引文统计之外,并不能完全解决如何正确衡量论文或研究人员所产生的兴趣的问题,因为引文统计仍然存在其他缺陷。其中之一是相关的自我引用。当发表了一篇论文的一小部分作者在发表另一篇论文时引用了前一篇论文时,就会出现这种情况;第一篇论文的作者,如果他的名字没有出现在第二篇论文上,就会得到完整的引用荣誉(这里称为关联自引),但是重复的作者不会,因为他们被自引取消了资格。相关的自我引用,即未被重复的作者获得引用信用,可能会扭曲文献计量学价值的衡量,但这是一个可以纠正的缺陷。此外,还有传播运气——当有其他具有可比性和价值的候选论文时,一篇论文成为被引用的参考文献——这是一个只能部分解决的问题。本文以作者作为合著者的两篇论文为例,比较了文献计量学的成功,分析了这些不足。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Associated Self-Citations and Propagation Luck: Two Problems with Citation Counts
Abstract:There is considerable merit in discounting self-citations when measuring the worth of a paper, a journal, or an author bibliometrically. However, excluding self-citations from the citation count for a paper or a researcher does not completely solve the problem of how to properly measure the interest generated by a paper or a researcher because other deficiencies in citation counts remain. One of these is associated self-citation. This occurs when a subset of the authors who published one paper go on to publish another paper in which they cite the previous one; any authors of the first paper whose names are not on the second paper receive a full citation credit (called here an associated self-citation), but the repeated authors do not because they are disqualified by self-citation. Associated self-citations, in which unrepeated authors receive citation credit, can skew a measure of bibliometric worth, but it is a deficiency that can be redressed. Additionally, there is propagation luck—where a paper becomes the reference to cite when there are other comparable and worthy candidates—which is a problem that can be only partially addressed. In this paper, the author analyzes these deficiencies with an example that compares the bibliometric success of two articles of which he was a co-author.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
15.40%
发文量
12
期刊介绍: For more than 40 years, the Journal of Scholarly Publishing has been the authoritative voice of academic publishing. The journal combines philosophical analysis with practical advice and aspires to explain, argue, discuss, and question the large collection of new topics that continually arise in the publishing field. JSP has also examined the future of scholarly publishing, scholarship on the web, digitization, copyright, editorial policies, computer applications, marketing, and pricing models. It is the indispensable resource for academics and publishers that addresses the new challenges resulting from changes in technology and funding and from innovations in production and publishing.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信