Search results

1 – 6 of 6
To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 1 August 1999

Emilio Delgado López‐cózar

Compliance with international standards for the presentation of periodical publications was evaluated in 221 Spanish biomedical journals. The objectives of the study were…

Abstract

Compliance with international standards for the presentation of periodical publications was evaluated in 221 Spanish biomedical journals. The objectives of the study were to determine the degree to which standards are actually used, and to develop recommendations for improving standards and increasing familiarity with them among authors, editors and publishers. Journals were identified from five printed and four electronic bibliographic databases. Compliance was assessed with the evaluation checklists developed by Lípez‐Cízar and Ruiz, based on 136 elements derived from standards for the presentation of periodical publications developed by the International Standardization Organization (ISO), and from recommendations published by UNESCO, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, the Council of Biology Editors and E.J. Huth. For most parameters three aspects were evaluated: presence, presentation and location. Compliance with publication standards by Spanish biomedical journals was generally low (34.3 per cent). This reflected the complete absence of specific elements relating to the volume (cover, contents list, index) and abstract sheet, rather than a general neglect of a large number of standards. In contrast, items related to characteristics that specifically distinguish periodical publications from other types of documents generally showed good compliance. The poor degree of compliance with standards by Spanish biomedical journals can be explained in part by the lack of familiarity with standards on the part of authors, editors and publishers, and in part by the fact that these three actors in the publication process are rarely involved in the creation and development of standards. To improve compliance, I propose changes in the policies on how standards are disseminated and how proposals for new standards or revisions of existing ones can be made, and suggest changes in some parts of ISO standards 8: 1977 and 215: 1986.

Details

Journal of Documentation, vol. 55 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0022-0418

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 9 October 2017

Enrique Orduña-Malea, Juan M. Ayllón, Alberto Martín-Martín and Emilio Delgado López-Cózar

Google Scholar Citations (GSC) provides an institutional affiliation link which groups together authors who belong to the same institution. The purpose of this paper is to…

Abstract

Purpose

Google Scholar Citations (GSC) provides an institutional affiliation link which groups together authors who belong to the same institution. The purpose of this paper is to ascertain whether this feature is able to identify and normalize all the institutions entered by the authors, and whether it is able to assign all researchers to their own institution correctly.

Design/methodology/approach

Systematic queries to GSC’s internal search box were performed under two different forms (institution name and institutional e-mail web domain) in September 2015. The whole Spanish academic system (82 institutions) was used as a test. Additionally, specific searches to companies (Google) and world-class universities were performed to identify and classify potential errors in the functioning of the feature.

Findings

Although the affiliation tool works well for most institutions, it is unable to detect all existing institutions in the database, and it is not always able to create a unique standardized entry for each institution. Additionally, it also fails to group all the authors who belong to the same institution. A wide variety of errors have been identified and classified.

Research limitations/implications

Even though the analyzed sample is good enough to empirically answer the research questions initially proposed, a more comprehensive study should be performed to calibrate the real volume of the errors.

Practical implications

The discovered affiliation link errors prevent institutions from being able to access the profiles of all their respective authors using the institutions lists offered by GSC. Additionally, it introduces a shortcoming in the navigation features of Google Scholar which may impair web user experience.

Social implications

Some institutions (mainly universities) are under-represented in the affiliation feature provided by GSC. This fact might jeopardize the visibility of institutions as well as the use of this feature in bibliometric or webometric analyses.

Originality/value

This work proves inconsistencies in the affiliation feature provided by GSC. A whole national university system is systematically analyzed and several queries have been used to reveal errors in its functioning. The completeness of the errors identified and the empirical data examined are the most exhaustive to date regarding this topic. Finally, some recommendations about how to correctly fill in the affiliation data (both for authors and institutions) and how to improve this feature are provided as well.

Details

Online Information Review, vol. 41 no. 6
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1468-4527

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 4 November 2014

Enrique Orduña-Malea, Alberto Martín-Martín, Juan M. Ayllon and Emilio Delgado López-Cózar

The purpose of this paper is to describe the obsolescence process of Microsoft Academic Search (MAS) as well as the effects of this decline in the coverage of disciplines…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to describe the obsolescence process of Microsoft Academic Search (MAS) as well as the effects of this decline in the coverage of disciplines and journals, and their influence in the representativeness of organizations.

Design/methodology/approach

The total number of records and those belonging to the most reputable journals (1,762) and organizations (346) according to the Field Rating indicator in each of the 15 fields and 204 sub-fields of MAS, have been collected and statistically analysed in March 2014, by means of an automated querying process via http, covering academic publications from 1700 to present.

Findings

MAS has no longer been updated since 2013, although this phenomenon began to be glimpsed in 2011, when its coverage plummeted. Throughout 2014, indexing of new records is still ongoing, but at a minimum rate, without following any apparent pattern.

Research limitations/implications

There are also retrospective records being indexed at present. In this sense, this research provides a picture of what MAS offered during March 2014 being queried directly via http.

Practical implications

The unnoticed obsolescence of MAS affects to the quality of the service offered to its users (both those who engage in scientific information seeking and also those who use it for quantitative purposes).

Social implications

The predominance of Google Scholar (GS) as monopoly in the academic search engines market as well as the prevalence of an open construction model (GS) vs a closed model (MAS).

Originality/value

A complete longitudinal analysis of disciplines, journals and organizations on MAS has been performed for the first time identifying an unnoticed obsolescence. Any public explanation or disclaimer note has been announced from the responsible company, something incomprehensible given its implications for the reliability and validity of bibliometric data provided on disciplines, journals, authors and congress as well as their fair representation on the academic search engine.

Details

Online Information Review, vol. 38 no. 7
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1468-4527

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 8 January 2014

Daniel Torres-Salinas, Nicolas Robinson-Garcia, Juan Miguel Campanario and Emilio Delgado López-Cózar

– The aim of this study is to analyse the disciplinary coverage of Thomson Reuters' Book Citation Index database focusing on publisher presence, impact and specialisation.

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study is to analyse the disciplinary coverage of Thomson Reuters' Book Citation Index database focusing on publisher presence, impact and specialisation.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors conducted a descriptive study in which they examined coverage by discipline, publisher distribution by field and country of publication, and publisher impact. For this purpose the Thomson Reuters' subject categories were aggregated into 15 disciplines.

Findings

Humanities and social sciences comprise 30 per cent of the total share of this database. Most of the disciplines are covered by very few publishers mainly from the UK and USA (75.05 per cent of the books), in fact 33 publishers hold 90 per cent of the whole share. Regarding publisher impact, 80.5 per cent of the books and chapters remained uncited. Two serious errors were found in this database: the Book Citation Index does not retrieve all citations for books and chapters; and book citations do not include citations to their chapters.

Originality/value

There are currently no studies analysing in depth the coverage of this novel database which covers monographs.

Details

Online Information Review, vol. 38 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1468-4527

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 8 June 2015

Enrique Orduña-Malea, Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, Jorge Serrano-Cobos and Nuria Lloret Romero

It is common for an international company to have different brands, products or services, information for investors, a corporate blog, affiliates, branches in different…

Abstract

Purpose

It is common for an international company to have different brands, products or services, information for investors, a corporate blog, affiliates, branches in different countries, etc. If all these contents appear as independent additional web domains (AWDs), the company should be represented on the web by all these web domains, since many of these AWDs may acquire remarkable performance that could mask or distort the real web performance of the company, affecting therefore on the understanding of web metrics. The purpose of this paper is to determine the amount, type, web impact and topology of the AWDs in commercial companies in order to get a better understanding on their complete web impact and structure.

Design/methodology/approach

The set of companies belonging to the Spanish IBEX-35 stock index has been analysed as testing bench. The authors proceeded to identify and categorise all AWDs belonging to these companies, and to apply both web impact (web presence and visibility) and network metrics.

Findings

The results show that AWDs get a high web presence but relatively low web visibility, due to certain opacity or less dissemination of some AWDs favoring its isolation. This is verified by the low network density values obtained, that occur because AWDs are strongly connected with the corporate domain (although asymmetrically), but very weakly linked each other.

Research limitations/implications

The categories used to classify the various AWD, although they are clearly distinguishable conceptually, have certain limitations in practice, since they depend on the form adopted by companies to publish certain content or to provide certain services or products. Otherwise, the use of web indicators presents certain problems of accuracy that could be softened if applied with caution and in a relational basis.

Originality/value

Although the processes of AWDs creation and categorisation are complex (web policy seems not to be driven by a defined or conscious plan), their influence on the web performance of IBEX 35 companies is meaningful. This research measures the AWDs influence on companies under webometric terms for the first time.

Details

Online Information Review, vol. 39 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1468-4527

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 20 January 2020

Mehri Sedighi

This paper aims to assess the impact of research in the field of scientometrics by using the altmetrics (social media metrics) approach.

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to assess the impact of research in the field of scientometrics by using the altmetrics (social media metrics) approach.

Design/methodology/approach

This is an applied study which uses scientometric and altmetrics methods. The research population consists of the studies and their citations published in the two core journals (Scientometrics and Journal of Informetrics) in a period of five years (included 1,738 papers and 11,504 citations). Collecting and extracting the studies directly was carried from Springer and ScienceDirect databases. The Altmetric Explorer, a service provided by Altmetric.com, was used to collect data on studies from various sources (www.altmetric.com/). The research studies with the altmetric scores were identified (included 830 papers). The altmetric scores represent the quantity and quality of attention that the study has received on social media. The association between altmetric scores and citation indicators was investigated by using correlation tests.

Findings

The findings indicated a significant, positive and weak statistical relationship between the number of citations of the studies published in the field of scientometrics and the altmetric scores of these studies, as well as the number of readers of these studies in the two social networks (Mendeley and Citeulike) with the number of their citations. In this study, there was no statistically significant relationship between the number of citations of the studies and the number of readers on Twitter. In sum, the above findings suggest that some social networks and their indices can be representations of the impact of scientific papers, similar citations. However, owing to the weakness of the correlation coefficients, the replacement of these two categories of indicators is not recommended, but it is possible to use the altmetrics indicators as complementary scientometrics indicators in evaluating the impact of research.

Originality/value

Investigating the impact of research on social media can reflect the social impact of research and can also be useful for libraries, universities, and research organizations in planning, budgeting, and resource allocation processes.

Details

Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication, vol. 69 no. 4/5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 2514-9342

Keywords

1 – 6 of 6