Search results

Predicting highly cited papers can enable an evaluation of the potential of papers and the early detection and determination of academic achievement value. However, most highly cited paper prediction studies consider early citation information, so predicting highly cited papers by publication is challenging. Therefore, the authors propose a method for predicting early highly cited papers based on their own features.

This research analyzed academic papers published in the Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) from 2000 to 2013. Five types of features were extracted: paper features, journal features, author features, reference features and semantic features. Subsequently, the authors applied a deep neural network (DNN), support vector machine (SVM), decision tree (DT) and logistic regression (LGR), and they predicted highly cited papers 1–3 years after publication.

Experimental results showed that early highly cited academic papers are predictable when they are first published. The authors’ prediction models showed considerable performance. This study further confirmed that the features of references and authors play an important role in predicting early highly cited papers. In addition, the proportion of high-quality journal references has a more significant impact on prediction.

Based on the available information at the time of publication, this study proposed an effective early highly cited paper prediction model. This study facilitates the early discovery and realization of the value of scientific and technological achievements.

Given the magnitude of the literature, a researcher must be selective of research papers and publications in general. In other words, only papers that meet strict standards of academic integrity and adhere to reliable and credible sources should be referenced. The purpose of this paper is to approach this issue from the prism of scientometrics according to the following research questions: Is it necessary to judge the quality of scientific production? How do we evaluate scientific production? What are the tools to be used in evaluation?

This paper presents a comparative study of scientometric evaluation practices and tools. A systematic literature review is conducted based on articles published in the field of scientometrics between 1951 and 2022. To analyze data, the authors performed three different aspects of analysis: usage analysis based on classification and comparison between the different scientific evaluation practices, type and level analysis based on classifying different scientometric indicators according to their types and application levels and similarity analysis based on studying the correlation between different quantitative metrics to identify similarity between them.

This comparative study leads to classify different scientific evaluation practices into externalist and internalist approaches. The authors categorized the different quantitative metrics according to their types (impact, production and composite indicators), their levels of application (micro, meso and macro) and their use (internalist and externalist). Moreover, the similarity analysis has revealed a high correlation between several scientometric indicators such as author h-index, author publications, citations and journal citations.

The interest in this study lies deeply in identifying the strengths and weaknesses of research groups and guides their actions. This evaluation contributes to the advancement of scientific research and to the motivation of researchers. Moreover, this paper can be applied as a complete in-depth guide to help new researchers select appropriate measurements to evaluate scientific production. The selection of evaluation measures is made according to their types, usage and levels of application. Furthermore, our analysis shows the similarity between the different indicators which can limit the overuse of similar measures.

This study builds on previous discussion of an important area for both academics and academic journals – the issue of reviewers inappropriately asking for (or “coercing”) citation of their own work. That situation creates an opportunity for (hopefully a small number of) academics to engage in unethical behaviour, often with the goal of increasing their citation count. This study aims to draw attention to this often-overlooked issue, critically considering potential reviewer motivations and offering possible remedies.

This study reviews literature and critically discusses this issue, offering a typology for coercive citation suggestions and sharing previously unpublished commentary from Editors of leading journals.

This study provides a typology of reviewer motivations for coercing citations, suggests potential remedies and considers the positive and negative impacts of these suggestions.

This study identifies an area known from multiple discussions to be important to academics and Editors, where many want changes in journals’ practices. In response, this study provides recommendations for easy changes that would decrease the opportunity for unethical behaviour by reviewers and also, for some journals, improve the quality of reviews.

The purpose of this study is to systematically review the existing literature on the concept of consumer sovereignty.

By leveraging a systematic literature review using a data-driven approach and quantitative methodology, this study provides an overview of the intellectual structure of consumer sovereignty research.

We explored the main topics that researchers tackled in consumer sovereignty research. Furthermore, we identified the theoretical lenses used in these studies. Finally, we proposed a research agenda to advance the scholarly debate on consumer sovereignty.

Some limitations should be acknowledged. First, the study only studied and analyzed consumer sovereignty articles that were published in peer-reviewed academic journals. Second, our review comprised journals identified in Scopus. Third, in this study, we have taken into account only articles written in English.

The authors expect the current review to significantly impact the identification of theories for the main trends in the academic analysis of consumer sovereignty and consumer behavior.

This study is the first to provide an integrated view of the body of consumer sovereignty. This review provides a strong contribution to consumer sovereignty literature by recommending a new research agenda for the concept of consumer sovereignty.

The competition in the academe has always been tough, but today, the academe seems to be more like an industry than an academic community as academics are evaluated through quantified and economic means.

This article leans on Heidegger’s thoughts on the essence of technology and his ontological view on being to show the dangers that lie in this quantification of researchers and research.

Despite the benefits that information systems (ISs) offer to people and research, it seems that technology has made it possible to objectify researchers and research. This has a negative impact on the academe and should thus be looked into especially by the IS field, which should note the problems that exist in its core. This phenomenon of quantified academics is clearly visible at academic quantification sites, where academics are evaluated using metrics that count their output. It seems that the essence of technology has disturbed the way research is valued by emphasising its quantifiable aspects. The study claims that it is important to look for other ways to evaluate researchers rather than trying to maximise research production, which has led to the flooding of articles that few have the time or interest to read.

This paper offers new insights into the current phenomenon of quantification of academics and underlines the need for critical changes if in order to achieve the academic culture that is desirable for future academics.

This paper aims to investigate the evolution, roots and influence of the rural entrepreneurship literature.

Using a bibliometric exercise, the analysis starts with investigation of studies on entrepreneurship and gathering all (772) articles on rural entrepreneurship (from 1981 to 2020) found in both Scopus and Web of Science up to 15 August 2020. Citation analysis of the references/citations of 755 articles are listed in the abstract database, generating a citation database involving 46,432 references/citations. This paper considers 635 (out of the 772) articles on rural entrepreneurship (i.e. articles cited in one or more studies), generating a database of 10,767 studies influenced by the rural entrepreneurship literature.

This study discovers that the relative importance of rural entrepreneurship within the entrepreneurship literature has increased in the last few years, but rural entrepreneurship remains a European concern; the most frequently addressed topics include growth and development, institutional frameworks and governance and rurality, with theory building being rather understudied. Most of the studies on rural entrepreneurship are empirical, involving mainly qualitative analyses and targeting high income countries; rural entrepreneurship is rooted in the fields of economics and entrepreneurship and is relatively self-referential.

This study provides a comprehensive and updated investigation of evolution of the rural entrepreneurship literature. The assessment of the literature’s scientific roots of rural entrepreneurship had not yet been tackled before. To the best of the author’s knowledge this study can be considered as the first effort for identifying the scientific influence of the rural entrepreneurship literature.

The aim of this research is to examine gender differences in the context of research productivity, research collaboration and academic promotion.

This research analyzes data related to 863 academics in the accounting and finance departments in Turkish universities by using OLS, Binary Logistic, Ordered Probit and Multinomial Probit Regressions.

The findings show that female academics have in overall a representation ratio of 32%, and that there are no significant differences regarding the opportunities for female academics to be employed in public compared to private, and in high-rank compared to low-rank universities. The results also indicate that female academics have lower research impact compared to male academics, and that this difference is more pronounced for professors, and in universities with low ratio of female representation, and also in public universities. In addition, female academics engage more in research collaboration and are less likely to hold the academic title of full professor than male academics.

The findings of this study provide significant signals about the need for improving gender policies that mitigate the conditions adversely affecting research productivity and impact by considering the supporting circumstances for female academics and improving the representation ratio, which also can play vital role in reducing discrimination and bias and contribute to better research and scientific environment.

To the author’s knowledge, this article is the first to examine gender effect regarding research productivity, research collaboration and academic promotion in Turkish universities.

In parallel with the rising importance of innovation and digital technologies, research on platform ecosystems is rapidly accumulating. This study aims to summarize the current research published in leading technical and innovation management (TIM) journals and provide recommendation for future research.

In this paper, the authors combine multiple quantitative literature review methods (social network analysis, citation analysis and co-citation analysis) with a systematic literature review of articles published in the 13 most influential TIM journals over a 15-year period.

The citation network of 168 selected papers is sparse, with low network density indicating the emerging nature of the field. Using network centrality values, the authors identified the 33 most influential articles. The review of methodologies in these articles found that conceptual and case study research dominate, suggesting the need for additional confirmatory and quantitative analysis. Co-citation analysis of the references identified six research clusters: foundation, network-centric innovation, complementor management, platform competition, ecosystemsand product platforms.

This analysis is among the first to examine the knowledge structure of platform ecosystem research in the TIM domain by using multiple evidence-based analysis methods. The authors also apply the theory, context, characteristics and methodology framework to suggest areas for future research.

This study explores the use and perceptions of scholarly journal ranking lists in the management field based on stakeholders’ lived experience.

The results are based on a survey of 463 active knowledge management and intellectual capital researchers.

Journal ranking lists have become an integral part of contemporary management academia: 33% and 37% of institutions and individual scholars employ journal ranking lists, respectively. The Australian Business Deans Council (ABDC) Journal Quality List and the UK Academic Journal Guide (AJG) by the Chartered Association of Business Schools (CABS) are the most frequently used national lists, and their influence has spread far beyond the national borders. Some institutions and individuals create their own journal rankings.

Management researchers employ journal ranking lists under two conditions: mandatory and voluntary. The forced mode of use is necessary to comply with institutional pressure that restrains the choice of target outlets. At the same time, researchers willingly consult ranking lists to advance their personal career, maximize their research exposure, learn about the relative standing of unfamiliar journals, and direct their students. Scholars, academic administrators, and policymakers should realize that journal ranking lists may serve as a useful tool when used appropriately, in particular when individuals themselves decide how and for what purpose to employ them to inform their research practices.

The findings reveal a journal ranking lists paradox: management researchers are aware of the limitations of ranking lists and their deleterious impact on scientific progress; however, they generally find journal ranking lists to be useful and employ them.

This study evaluates the knowledge structure of medical tourism within the geographical context of South East Asia. This region is one of the growing economic powerhouses in the world, and tourism activities have contributed a lot to its advancement.

Applying a science mapping technique using bibliometric analysis, the current and emerging themes and future trends are analyzed using bibliographic coupling and co-word analysis.

Findings show that current trends produced four themes: Fundamentals of medical tourism in Southeast Asia, determinants of tourist medical tourism visits, quality of medical and health service in Southeast Asia and impact of medical tourism on national economic growth. The future trends also produced four themes related to navigating excellence in medical tourism, medical tourism and economic growth, service quality in medical tourism services and accredited destinations in the globalized era of medical tourism.

This study is relevant to all stakeholders, operators and local communities in Southeast Asia tourism destinations to provide the best medical tourism with the best quality service and technologies.

This study fills the gap by performing a bibliometric approach to reviewing medical tourism in Southeast Asia using a science mapping technique. Crucial themes are produced through topological and temporal streams that provide critical insight for future developments in medical tourism in the region.