Application of Lotka's Law and i10-Index with the Number of Authors of Articles in Chemistry in Iran Published between 2000 and 2020 (original) (raw)
Related papers
Informology, 2022
The i10-index is one of the newest scientometric indicators used to evaluate researchers in any field of science. The present study analyzes the top ten percent of Iranian medical researchers using the i10-index in the Web of Science database. Materials and Methods: The present study is descriptive-analytical research conducted using a scientometric approach. The research population includes the top ten percent of Iranian medical researchers whose publications were indexed in the Web of Science database between 2011 and 2020. Descriptive and inferential statistics and i10-index were used to analyze the data using the HistCite and the BibExcel software. Then, the results were sorted in the Excel software. Finally, the h-index and the number of citations of all researchers were compared with their i10-index. Results: The findings show that in medical sciences, Iran ranked 23rd in the world, sixth in Asia, and first in the Middle East in Web of Science in the period 2011-2020, and the growth of scientific publications shows an upward trend. Moreover, there is a direct and positive relationship between the h-index and the i10-index of the top ten percent of medical researchers. This is confirmed with a correlation of 0.645. Also, a correlation of 0.269 shows a direct and positive relationship between the number of citations and the i10-index of the top ten percent of medical researchers. Conclusion: The results show that there is a positive and direct relationship between the h-index and the number of citations of the top ten percent of Iranian medical researchers with their i10-index.
2021
This study aims to analyze the productivity patterns of authors in Health Science using publications indexed in Maharashtra University of Health Services (MUHS) Consortium from 2001 to 2013 based on Lotka's Law. Lotka's Law of scientific productivity provides a platform for studying inequality in authors' productivity patterns in a given field and over a specified period. This study covers all the journal articles on Health Sciences over a period of Ten years (2001-2013) in Maharashtra University of Health Services (MUHS) Consortium, of which 20724 articles were reported to have been published during this period. The findings of the study reveal that in the productivity distribution for authors on the subject of Health Sciences/Medicine, only co-authors and non-collaborative authors' categories fit in the Lotka's Law, whereas all-authors and first-author categories differ from the distribution of Lotka's inverse square law. The Lotka's law on authorship productivity of E-Journals of health Science has been tested to confirm the applicability of the law to the present data set. A K-S test was applied to measure the degree of agreement between the distribution of the observed set of data against the inverse general power relationship and the theoretical value of α = 2. It is found that the inverse square law of Lotka follows as such.
Researchers with different scientific career durations vary in their scientific productivity. Therefore, it is necessary to normalize their publication numbers by their scientific career durations in order to have a more objective comparison among researchers. The present study attempts to verify the impact of scientific career duration on research evaluation using scientometrics method. To do so, it compares Iranian researchers' publication rates in various disciplines covered in the Science Citation Index (SCI) during the period of 1991-2011. The analysis concentrates on those Iranian, who are corresponding authors, with long scientific career durations. The results show that the disciplines significantly vary in their researchers’ scientific career durations and their crude number of papers. However, no significant difference was observed in the researchers' publication rates when the comparisons are limited to 21-year SCD researchers, the dominant group of the sample. In other words, the differences observed between many disciplines in their scientific productivity would disappear after normalizing the publication counts by authors’ scientific career duration. This implies that comparison among scientists would be reasonable only if they are of the same area of expertise and in similar phases of their scientific lives. It is of special importance to those studies on research assessment that concentrate on a single year or a limited time period.
Scientometrics, 2014
The citation potential is a measure of the probability of being cited. Obviously, it is different among fields of science, social science, and humanities because of systematic differences in publication and citation behaviour across disciplines. In the past, the citation potential was studied at journal level considering the average number of references in established groups of journals (for example, the crown indicator is based on the journal subject categories in the Web of Science database). In this paper, some characterizations of the author's scientific research through three different research dimensions are proposed: production (journal papers), impact (journal citations), and reference (bibliographical sources). Then, we propose different measures of the citation potential for authors based on a proportion of these dimensions. An empirical application, in a set of 120 randomly selected highly productive authors from the CSIC Research Centre (Spain) in four subject areas, shows that the ratio between production and impact dimensions is a normalized measure of the citation potential at the level of individual authors. Moreover, this ratio reduces the between-group variance in relation to the within-group variance in a higher proportion than the rest of the indicators analysed. Furthermore, it is consistent with the type of journal impact indicator used. A possible application of this result is in the selection and promotion Highlights 1. We provide some different characterizations of the research area at author level based on three dimensions: production (journal papers), impact (journal citations), and reference (bibliographical sources). 2. We propose some measures of the citation potential for authors, based on proportions between dimensions. 3. We compare the dimensions and proportions in a set of 120 randomly selected highly productive authors from the CSIC Research Centre (Spain) in four subject areas. 4. The ratio between production and impact dimensions reduces the between-group variance in relation to the within-group variance in a higher proportion than the rest of measures analysed. Furthermore, it is consistent with the type of journal impact indicator used.
Scientometrics Study of Impact of Journal Indexing on the Growth of Sci- entific Productions of Iran
Background: This study represents scientific production of Iran in medical sciences field at recent years, and the correlation between scientific productions with the number of indexed journals. Methods: Data extracted from SCOPUS database between years 2000 and 2011, and Iran's performance measured in terms of different Scientometrics indexes including self-citations, percent of cited articles, number of articles with international collaboration and contribution of Iran in medical sciences in Middle East and world. Moreover correlation between the number of articles, citations, self-citations, and H-index and number of indexed journals for 50 countries in all fields is included.
In this study, we conducted quantitative analysis of 1706 scholarly literature published in Journal of Documentation during the period of 1970 to 2019 (fifty years) using a series of scientometric indicators. Annual scientific production, most local cited sources, the ranking of authors; profiles, contributions, correlation, collaboration and authorship pattern, most contributed countries, most cited articles, frequently used search terms/keywords, and the legend of historiographic mapping were analysed in detail to measure the impact of the source. Design/methodology/approach We used the Scopus database for retrieving the desired sample data. In total, 1,706 numbers of publications records were considered for the literature analysis considering their relevancy. Biblioshiny data visualization tool is used to create the various maps. Findings The present study found that annual scientific production and average citations constantly have had an uptrend. The journal's had tremendous impact with an h-index of 80, with a g-index of 148, total citations of 37,161 within the studied period. Although Bawden D contributed the highest number of research papers (n=78), the work published by Hjørland B received the highest citations. Lotka's Law reveals that about 75.04% of the authors (1319 authors) have one publication, and approximately 12.73% of the authors (225 authors) have two publications. The United Kingdom was the dominant country in terms of number of papers and citation count whereas University of Sheffield topped with 128 publications. The thematic map consists of eleven clusters and 'information retrieval' found to be the largest cluster comprehending 56 subthemes occurring 995 times. Co-citation network identified four clusters with revealing Wilson TD as the most cited authors. The study also indicates the most collaborative authors are from the United Kingdom. Research limitations/implications The study exclusively deals with 1732 published research literature indexed in the Scopus database covering a span of fifty years (from 1970 to 2019). Thus, documents which are not covered in Scopus are excluded from the purview of research. This study is significant in order to measure the impact of Journal of Documentation and useful to identify valuable research patterns from publications and of developments in the field of Information Science.
2016
This paper aims to evaluate the scientific publication research productivity in Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science (MJLIS) for period of nineteen years between 1996 and 2014 with total of 315 research publications. For the purpose of this present study, the various attributes of this publication to know about chronology wise total papers, total authors, total citations, average authors per paper, average citation per paper, exponential growth rate, degree of collaboration, collaborative index, relative growth rate, doubling time, co-authorship index, subject wise distribution, institution and country wise distribution and length of papers have also analyzed. The scientometric tools and techniques such as Degree of Collaboration, Collaborative Index, Exponential Growth Rate, and Co-authorship index for measuring the output so as to arrive the appropriate results and findings during the period of study. The results reveal that out of 315 papers, 8.89% are the greates...
The Productivity and Characteristics of Iranian Biomedical Journal: A Scientometric Analysis
Iranian Biomedical Journal, 2018
Background: Scientometrics is a discipline that analyzes scientific publications to explore the structure and growth of science. In this work, the quantitative evaluation of the productivity of the Iranian Biomedical Journal (IBJ) is reviewed. Methods: The analysis was done based on a cross-sectional descriptive and an analytical scientometric study. Data were collected from PubMed, Scopus, and Scimago Databases (2000-2017). Scopus and Scimago were used for data search and feature analysis. Analyzed scientometric indicators included the number of citations, publications, CiteScore, SJR (Scimago Journal Rank), SNIP (source normalized impact per paper), self-citation, and Q (quartile) trend. Results: The evaluation of 586 documents, published in IBJ from 2000 to 2017, revealed that most of these documents (99.7%) have been published in the areas of biochemistry, genetics, and molecular biology, which yielded to an upgrade in Journal Q ranking from Q4 (in 2000) to Q2 (in 2016). Conclusion: Nearly all of the scientometric indicators, evaluated in this study, were found on the rise. Therefore, a growing trend from Q2 to Q1 is predicted for the near future. It is recommended that the journal focuses on a specific subject area to improve the indicators and quality of the journal, in a timely manner.
RESEARCH PRODUCTIVITY OF MIZORAM UNIVERSITY, AIZAWL DURING 2002-2018: A BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS
Journal of Indian Library Association , 2020
The present paper is a bibliometric enquiry of Mizoram University for a period of 17 years, from 2002-2018. The total number of publication during study period was 586 articles. The aim of this stated paper was to analyse the pattern of authorship, geographical distribution, types of document, prolific author and found that 2016 and 2017 are the most productive year for this university with 108 (18.43%) and 84 (14.33%) publications. The maximum documents published during the study period are in the form of research article 545(93%) followed by review paper 17(2.9%). Thapa, R.K. 82 (21.58%) and Tiwari, D. 61 (16.05%) were the most prolific contributors and highest publications are published in the Current Science journal.