Search

A stylised fact in bibliometric research is that in the field of management studies, half or more of the papers published are never cited. If true, this implies that efforts and resources are considerably wasted because half of the academic work is not considered worthy by the same community that developed them. We studied a sample of 2777 papers published in 20 journals and representing different levels of quality. Of these, only 191 papers, representing 6.5% of the sample, were never cited, suggesting that the aforementioned stylised fact is a myth. We identified the factors that contribute to the level of citations, including the ranking of the journal in the quality list, time since last citation, and number of authors. The implications discussed suggest a need for reflection regarding the relevance of the factors that predict future citations.

Introduction: The academic social network site ResearchGate (www.researchgate.net) enables researchers to feature up to five of their research products (including papers, datasets and chapters) in a 'Featured research' section on their ResearchGate home page. This provides an opportunity to discover how researchers view their own publications. Method: We investigated ResearchGate members who self-selected their featured publications and compared these publications with other publications listed in ResearchGate. Analysis: We analysed the distribution of featured publications in the ResearchGate members' whole publications in terms of their importance, recency, citation and source reputation. Results: Researchers prefer to feature publications in which they played important roles, those that were recently published, highly cited and published by reputable sources. Conclusion: By featuring their research, researchers can highlight their academic achievements and create the potential to contribute to the wider scientific community through the future application or discussion of their work. Instances of featured research published for a relatively long period in somewhat obscure journals, with few citations, show that there is a difference between how these papers are valued by the scientific community and the authors who featured them. The presented method may be applied to find latent sleeping beauties.

Background: In previous decades, large-scale research has been carried out on bacterial meningitis. In every field, citation analysis is the most significant contribution. The study's objective was to identify and analyze the 100 articles on bacterial meningitis that received the most citations between 2000 and 2023, highlighting the most significant developments in the field. Objective: The objective of this study was to find out what makes a highly influential article by identifying and analyzing the characteristics of the 100 articles in the field of bacterial meningitis that receive the most citations. The goal of this study was to find and examine the 100 articles on bacterial meningitis that received the most citations. Methodology: We identified the top 100 most-cited papers in the field of bacterial meningitis from 55 journals using the Dimensions AI database. The results of each author's analysis of 100 articles were then compared. We gathered fundamental data such as the journal's title, country of publication, and study type. Descriptive counts or percentages were used to compare the various categories. Results: Between the year 2000 and the year 2023, articles were published. The total number of citations ranged from 115 to 1176, with 42 papers receiving more than 200 citations. In 2008, 14 articles were published, followed by 10 in 2000 and 2007. One thousand one hundred and seventy-six times were given to the most-cited paper, whereas 115 times were given to the least-cited article. "Clinical Features and Prognostic Factors in Adults with Bacterial Meningitis," by Diederik van de Beek, et al. (2004) was the article that received the most citations. 1176 people have cited this article. van de Beek Diederik of the Academic Medical Center in The Netherlands is the author who has written the most articles, was mentioned in 14 of the top 100 articles. Papers were primarily published in Pediatrics (n = 9) publication with 1861 citations. The Netherlands came in second with 18 publications, followed by the United States (n = 46). Conclusion: Our study uses bibliometrics and visualization analysis of the most important articles in this field to show the current state of research in the area of bacterial meningitis, provide a history of research trends, and offer a perspective for future bacterial predicts the growth of meningitis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purposes of this study were to examine the extent to which literature was used to discuss findings in selected papers from Zimbabwe Journal, and to compare the quality of reviews in this journal with other international journals. The study was largely qualitative in nature and used convenient sampling. In the study, the Zimbabwe Journal was chosen because of easy access. Three papers were conveniently selected based on personal interest and areas previously studied. Content analysis was used to compare the quality of discussion of literature in the sampled papers. Findings suggest that authors cite relevant literature extensively in the background to the study but use the same literature sparingly in the discussion of their results. Further, in the discussion of findings, the use of literature was limited to confirming what was already known, and does not show how the new studies reported contribute to knowledge. The study concluded that the journal studied was failing to attract authors who write high quality papers. Perhaps the journal should broaden its brief and target an international audience, because at present as evident in the three cases cited, the journal can only reach out to practitioners within (Southern) Africa.

Purpose – This study aims to map the conceptual structure and evolution of the recent scientific literature published in marketing journals to identify the areas of interest and potential future research directions. Design/methodology/approach – The 100 most influential marketing academic papers published between 2018 and 2022 were identified and scrutinized through a bibliometric analysis. Findings – The findings further upheld the critical role of emerging technologies such as Blockchain in marketing and identified artificial intelligence and live streaming as emerging trends, reinforcing the importance of data-driven marketing in the discipline. Research limitations/implications – The data collection included only the 100 most cited documents between 2018 and 2022, and data were limited only to Scopus database and restrained to the Scopus-indexed marketing journals. Moreover, documents were selected based on the number of citations. Nevertheless, the data set may still provide significant insight into the marketing field. Practical implications – Influential authors, papers and journals identified in this study will facilitate future literature searches and scientific dissemination in the field. This study makes an essential contribution to the marketing literature by identifying hot topics and suggesting future research themes. Also, the important role of emerging technologies and the shift of marketing toward a more data-driven approach will have significant practical implications for marketers. Originality/value – To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first comprehensive study offering a general overview of the leading trends and researchers in marketing state-of-the-art research.

The primary objective of this paper was to provide insights into papers that garnered significant attention in news outlets. A sample of seventy academic papers, each with over 500 mentions in news outlets, was chosen for this study via Dimensions. Comprehensive data for each paper was extracted from diverse sources, encompassing the Journal Citation Report (JCR), Scopus, SCImago, Altmetric.com, as well as analyses of the titles and abstracts. Findings concerning the characteristics of these papers revealed that those highly referenced in news outlets tend to be predominantly published in open access within prestigious specialized journals, with a primary focus on medical and health-related topics. The majority of these papers have been published within the last three years, with each accumulating more than 100 citations in Scopus. Additionally, the results indicated that the number of authors and international collaboration does not exert a substantial influence on the frequency of news posts dedicated to highly mentioned papers in news outlets. However, the journal's impact factor, paper citation count, and the alignment of the paper's affiliation country with that of the news outlets displayed a notable correlation with the frequency of news posts pertaining to these papers. Based on the study's findings, it can be inferred that science journalists place higher emphasis on considerations such as proximity, prestige, timeliness, and relevance in their coverage, prioritizing these factors over other news values. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of this study is to address the disciplinary variations in Journal Impact Factor (JIF), enabling its reasonable application in the evaluation of journals across diverse disciplines. To achieve this, the study utilized journals indexed in the Journal Citation Reports and considered papers from eight distinct disciplines as the research subjects. The citations of papers within each academic field were transformed into normal distributions, each with a different base logarithm. Subsequently, the logarithm-corrected impact factor (IFlog) for each journal was calculated. Category normalization for the IFlog (cnIFlog) was conducted by dividing each journal's IFlog by the logarithmic correction aggregate impact factor of the discipline to which it belongs and the superiorities of cnIFlog in the evaluation of academic journals across different disciplines were demonstrated empirically. The results showed that taking different base logarithms could convert the citations of the journal papers into an approximately normal distribution. The IFlog of the eight disciplines' journals was normally distributed, and the IFlog1.5, IFln, IFlog5, and IFlog10 of the journals were 100% positively related (r=1.000, P=0.000) both in the same and different disciplines. Compared with the impact factor (IF2018), average impact factor percentile (aJIFP), journal index of PR8 (JIPR8), IFlog and relative impact factor (rIF2018), and other indicators, cnIFlog1.5 exhibits the least variation among the journals from the eight different fields. In comparison to aJIFP and JIPR8, it demonstrates the highest correlation, ideal discrimination, and stability. It is concluded that cnIFlog1.5 is an ideal journal evaluation indicator in same or different disciplines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The main objective of this study is to evaluate Citizenship Education (CE) literature through systematic bibliometric analysis. The science mapping method was conducted to analyze data. Because CE is also studied with the names of social studies and civic education in the literature, articles related to these topics were included in the study. 4029 articles and proceeding papers that were obtained from the WoS database were analyzed. As a result of the study, it was revealed that number of publications has been dramatically increased in recent years. Moreover, Theory and Research in Social Education Journal was found as the most relevant source in terms of number of publications about CE. Furthermore, the study conducted by Westheimer and Kahne in 2004 was determined as the most influential source that has the most citations per year in the field. Finally, it was found that USA and UK are the most productive, most cited, and most collaborative countries in terms of scientific publications.

The study examines the change in pattern of impact factor and SCImago Journal Ranking (SJR) of the journal under study from 2008 to 2021 besides examining the pattern of growth of the number of papers. The study identified the most prolific actors (authors, institutions, and countries), besides examining their citation impact in terms of citation per paper & relative citation impact. The pattern of citation and highly cited papers have also been identified. Based on the analysis of data it is observed that the number of articles published was highest and almost equal in the years 2013, 2016, and 2017. Using the methodology of the complete count of records, it is observed that 56 countries contributed 2,939 articles. China followed by the USA published the highest number of papers. The value of CPP was highest for Universidad de Granada (Spain) and Leiden University (the Netherlands). Among the authors, Nees Jan van Eck and Ludo Waltman of the Leiden University had the highest CPP. Only a minuscule number of published articles remained uncited. Article authored by Aria, M. and Cuccurullo, C. published in issue 11(4), 2017, 959-975 of the journal received the highest number of citations. The pattern of authorship indicates that during the first ten years, more papers were single and two-authored while during 2017-2021 more number of papers were multi-authored. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Who are the most prestigious authors cited in today's psychology textbooks and journals? And where are (or where were) they based? This short note reports on the answers gained to such questions by using the Web of Science Core Collection to find the authors of the most highly cited papers in psychology published between 1927 and 2012. The findings suggest that well-known historic figures of the past have now been replaced with tool makers.

Bibliometrics is successful in measuring impact because the target is clearly defined: the publishing scientist who is still active and working. Thus, citations are a target-oriented metric which measures impact on science. In contrast, societal impact measurements based on altmetrics are as a rule intended to measure impact in a broad sense on all areas of society (e.g. science, culture, politics, and economics). This tendency is especially reflected in the efforts to design composite indicators (e.g. the Altmetric Attention Score). We deem appropriate that not only the impact measurement using citations is target-oriented (citations measure the impact of papers on scientists) but also the measurement of impact using altmetrics. Impact measurements only make sense, if the target group--the recipient of academic papers--is clearly defined. Thus, we extend in this study the field-normalized reader impact indicator proposed by us in an earlier study, which is based on Mendeley data (the mean normalized reader score, MNRS), to a target-oriented field-normalized impact indicator (e.g. MNRSED measures reader impact on the sector of educational donation, i.e. teaching). This indicator can show--as demonstrated in empirical examples--the ability of journals, countries, and academic institutions to publish papers which are below or above the average impact of papers on a specific sector in society (e.g. the educational or teaching sector). Thus, the method allows to measure the impact of scientific papers on certain groups--controlling for the field in which the papers have been published and their publication year.

Predatory publishing is the unethical and dishonest behavior of publishers who take advantage of researchers by charging them too much money and not providing good editing and peer-review services. Scholars, publishers and policymakers are seeking solutions to combat predatory publishing, which has become a major academic problem. This research paper provides a bibliometric analysis of the citation patterns and trends in the predatory publishing literature. The study analyzed the 100 top-cited papers on predatory publishing and provided insight into the types of documents, journals, authors, and countries that contributed to this field. The average citation per paper in the top 100 selected publications was 53.67. Open-access publications received a significantly higher average citation per paper than subscription-based papers. "Article" was the major type of document published, followed by "Notes," "Reviews" and "Editorials." Nature and Learned Publishing were the journals that contained the highest number of top-cited articles. J. Beall and D. Moher authored the highest number of papers, while A. Grudniewicz had the highest average citation per paper. USA and Canada were the top countries in these top-cited publications. This study will be beneficial to the all the stakeholders who may be interested in this area of research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background The number of citations a paper receives reflects its impact on the scientific community. We aimed to identify and explore the characteristics of the most cited papers on total anomalous pulmonary venous connection (TAPVC). Methods Web of Science Core Collection Expanded Science Citation Index (1900 to present) was searched and papers on TAPVC were reviewed. Articles were ranked by the number of citations and the 100 most cited papers were analyzed. Results The 100 most cited papers were published between 1952 and 2018 with a mean number of citations of 52 (range 26 to 148). The 1990s was the most productive decade. All articles except one were written in English. The 100 most cited articles were published in 24 journals, led by Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (21 articles), followed by Annals of Thoracic Surgery (20 articles), and Circulation (16 articles). The United States of America contributed most of the 100 most cited papers (60 articles). Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto led the list of citation classics with six papers. Christopher A. Caldarone, John W. Kirklin, and P. E. F. Daubeney were the most productive authors with 3 articles each. More than half of the papers were cohort studies (51 articles). Surgery, radiology and etiology were the main topics. Thirty-one articles were funded by public foundations, and none received support from commercial companies. Conclusions The bibliometric analysis gives a historical perspective on scientific progress in the field of TAPVC and lays the foundation for future research.

Identifying factors that associate with more cited or higher quality research may be useful to improve science or to support research evaluation. This article reviews evidence for the existence of such factors in article text and metadata. It also reviews studies attempting to estimate article quality or predict long‐term citation counts using statistical regression or machine learning for journal articles or conference papers. Although the primary focus is on document‐level evidence, the related task of estimating the average quality scores of entire departments from bibliometric information is also considered. The review lists a huge range of factors that associate with higher quality or more cited research in some contexts (fields, years, journals) but the strength and direction of association often depends on the set of papers examined, with little systematic pattern and rarely any cause‐and‐effect evidence. The strongest patterns found include the near universal usefulness of journal citation rates, author numbers, reference properties, and international collaboration in predicting (or associating with) higher citation counts, and the greater usefulness of citation‐related information for predicting article quality in the medical, health and physical sciences than in engineering, social sciences, arts, and humanities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Quantifiable predictability in the citation counts of articles is significant in scientometrics and informetrics. Many metrics based on the citation counts can evaluate the scientific impact of research articles and journals. Utilising time series models, an article's citation counts up to the y th year after publication can be predicted by those up to the previous years. However, the typically used models cannot predict the fat tail of the actual citation distributions. Thus, based on cumulative advantage of the citation behaviour, we propose a method to predict the accumulated citation counts, by using a random number sampled from a power-law distribution to modify the results given by a recurrent neural network (RNN), long short-term memory. Extensive experiments on the data set including 17 journals in information science verified the effectiveness of our method by the good fittings on distributions and evolutionary trends of the citation counts of articles. Our method has the potential to be extended to predict other popular assessment measures such as impact factor and h -index for journals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The utilization of antibiotic adjuvants presents a promising strategy for addressing bacterial resistance. Recently, the development of antibiotic adjuvants has attracted considerable attention from researchers in academia and industry. This study aimed to identify the most influential publications on antibiotic adjuvants and elucidate the hotspots and research trends in this field.Method: Original articles and reviews related to antibiotic adjuvants were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection database. The top 100 highly cited publications were selected and the visual analyses of publication outputs, countries, institutions, authors, journals, and keywords were conducted using Excel, VOSviewer, or CtieSpace software tools.Results: The top 100 cited publications concerning antibiotic adjuvants spanned the years 1977–2020, with citation counts ranging from 174 to 2,735. These publications encompassed 49 original articles and 51 reviews. The journal “Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy” accounted for the highest number of publications (12%). The top 100 cited publications emanated from 39 countries, with the United States leading in production. Institutions in Canada and the United States exhibited the most substantial contributions to these highly cited publications. A total of 526 authors participated in these studies, with Robert E.W. Hancock, Laura J. V. Piddock, Xian-Zhi Li, Hiroshi Nikaido, and Olga Lomovskaya emerging as the most frequently nominated authors. The most common keywords included “E. coli”, “P. aeruginosa”, “S. aureus”, “in-vitro activity”, “antimicrobial peptide”, “efflux pump inhibitor” “efflux pump”, “MexAB-OprM” and “mechanism”. These keywords underscored the hotspots of bacterial resistance mechanisms and the development of novel antibiotic adjuvants.Conclusion: Through the bibliometric analysis, this study identified the top 100 highly cited publications on antibiotic adjuvants. Moreover, the findings offered a comprehensive understanding of the characteristics and frontiers in this field.

In fall 2008, students from first-year Composition I and upper-level classes at Florida Gulf Coast University participated in a citation analysis study. The citation pages of their research papers revealed that the students used more books, more types of sources, and more overall sources when a librarian provided instruction. When these results were compared to those produced by students in upper-level classes (all of whom received instruction), it was discovered that, as the class level increased, the number of citations and the percentage of scholarly citations generally increased and there was a high preference for books from all disciplines, especially history.

Citation analysis of 265 Workforce Education and Development (WED) dissertations, theses, and graduate research papers at Southern Illinois University Carbondale (SIUC) was used to (1) determine core serials in the discipline, (2) provide Morris Library with a guide to serials acquisition and maintenance in the discipline, and (3) provide future WED students with a core list of WED journals. This study has applicability as a specific instance of applied citation analysis as well as for academic librarians faced with acquiring and maintaining serials in WED.

Citation analysis is used extensively in the bibliometrics literature to assess the impact of individual works, researchers, institutions, and even entire fields of study. In this article, we analyze citations in one large and influential field within computer science, namely computer systems. Using citation data from a cross-sectional sample of 2,088 papers in 50 systems conferences from 2017, we examine four research areas of investigation: overall distribution of systems citations; their evolution over time; the differences between databases (Google Scholar and Scopus), and; the characteristics of self-citations in the field. On citation distribution, we find that overall, systems papers were well cited, with the most cited subfields and conference areas within systems being security, databases, and computer architecture. Only 1.5% of papers remain uncited after five years, while 12.8% accrued at least 100 citations. For the second area, we find that most papers achieved their first citation within a year from publication, and the median citation count continued to grow at an almost linear rate over five years, with only a few papers peaking before that. We also find that early citations could be linked to papers with a freely available preprint, or may be primarily composed of self-citations. For the third area, it appears that the choice of citation database makes little difference in relative citation comparisons, despite marked differences in absolute counts. On the fourth area, we find that the ratio of self-citations to total citations starts relatively high for most papers but appears to stabilize by 12–18 months, at which point highly cited papers revert to predominately external citations. Past self-citation count (taken from each paper’s reference list) appears to bear little if any relationship with the future self-citation count of each paper. The primary practical implication of these results is that the impact of systems papers, as measured in citations, tends to be high relative to comparable studies of other fields and that it takes at least five years to stabilize. A secondary implication is that at least for this field, Google Scholar appears to be a reliable source of citation data for relative comparisons.

Open data as an integral part of the open science movement enhances the openness and sharing of scientific datasets. Nevertheless, the normative utilization of data journals, data papers, scientific datasets, and data citations necessitates further research. This study aims to investigate the citation practices associated with data papers and to explore the role of data papers in disseminating scientific datasets. Dataset accession numbers from NCBI databases were employed to analyze the prevalence of data citations for data papers from PubMed Central. A dataset citation practice identification rule was subsequently established. The findings indicate a consistent growth in the number of biomedical data journals published in recent years, with data papers gaining attention and recognition as both publications and data sources. Although the use of data papers as citation sources for data remains relatively rare, there has been a steady increase in data paper citations for data utilization through formal data citations. Furthermore, the increasing proportion of datasets reported in data papers that are employed for analytical purposes highlights the distinct value of data papers in facilitating the dissemination and reuse of datasets to support novel research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper investigates retracted articles indexed in the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) Brazil, using bibliometric techniques to identify the characteristics of these retractions and relevant citation trends. All records of retracted articles from the first record in October 2004 to April 2022 were included. Sixty-seven retractions and 870 citations pre- and post-retraction were analyzed. Results indicate a change of scenario that began in 2015, with recurrences of retracted articles allegedly produced by paper mills. The prevalence of retractions derived from professional misconduct in health research and the frequency of post-retraction citations in health sciences raise concerns in the chain of stakeholders, public health, and scientific development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Investigates the potential value of bibliometric analysis of freshman English research paper bibliographies to assess student behavior in terms of skills and resources addressed in library instruction sessions. Suggests that students' bibliographies provide a flexible, time-efficient assessment method for the documentation of student library use. (Author/LRW)

This is the last of three studies designed to assess the interchange between the geography education community, the larger geography field, and other disciplines. Our previous studies have examined citation patterns between geography education journals and quantified whether a paradigm shift was occurring from a focus on strategies and methods towards understanding the learning and teaching process. Further, we wanted to know "who are we listening to?" The answer is that while we were listening to ourselves (geography education), our scholars were incorporating knowledge, ideas, and perspectives from the larger geography community and importantly from academicians and professionals trained in pedagogy and education theories. This study asks the question, "who is listening to us?" Our results indicate that education scholars are actually reading our publications. There were distinct lines of communication between those from geography education and the disciplines of education that permeate journals, books, conference proceedings, theses and dissertations, and other outlets (i.e. reports, blogs, wikis).

Analysis of 310 papers presented at 1990-94 meetings of the Canadian Association for the Study of Adult Education showed a substantial increase in female and Canadian authors cited. More women collaborated in adult education research in publishing than men did. Emphasis on reviving adult education's role in social change was increasing. (SK)

Loet Leydesdorff (mentioned as Loet in the following) passed away in March 2023. Our paper is dedicated to the important contributions of this exceptional researcher (in scientometrics). We investigated which studies, theories, methods, and ideas have influenced Loet's scientific work. The method reference publication year spectroscopy (RPYS) can be used to answer this and related questions. Many RPYS studies have been published regarding the historical roots of research fields, journals, and scientists. The program CRExplorer was specifically developed for RPYS. In this study, we used CRExplorer to investigate the historical roots and influential publications of Loet's oeuvre. The results demonstrate the wide range of topics in Loet's research and their fundamental meaning for the scientometric field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent time the performance measurement of any institute (or author) is considered as one of the major issues. The reason is the given institute publishes several papers in distinct area which may contain multiple-affiliations or authors. In this case, the precise analysis of quantity and quality with respect to domain based expert, the founding author is difficult tasks. It requires different metric based on expert Turiyam awareness rather than just h-index, i10, g-index or t-index. To achieve this goal, a method is proposed to investigate the high quality papers, type of co-authorship, highly cited papers, regular paper, special issues, short notes, review, letter to editor, book chapter, conference papers, frontier research etc. The motive is to measure the two institutes and its performance equally on several other parameters rather than only document count and citation. The proposed method will also provide a way to measure the performance of any Institute using patent granted, copyright and software code. In addition another method is proposed to visualize the performance of two or more institute in hierarchical order using properties of concept lattice. To achieve this goal, one of the best Indian institutes i.e. IISC Bengaluru is considered for the illustration. The data is taken from SCOPUS to demonstrate the method and its validation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ruscio, Seaman, D'Oriano, Stremlo, and Mahalchik (this issue) evaluate 22 bibliometric indicators, including conventional measures, like the number of publications, the "h" index, and many "h" index variants. To assess the quality of the indicators, their well-justified criteria encompass conceptual, empirical, and practical issues: ease of understanding, accuracy of calculation, effects on incentives, influence of extreme scores, and validity. Although they found that some indicators are more attractive for research evaluation purposes than others, the correlation between most of the indicators is (very) high. A generally high correlation between the indicators points out a redundant contribution each to each other. Calculating a comprehensive metaanalysis, Bornmann and colleagues (Bornmann, Mutz, Hug, & Daniel, 2011) came to a very similar result: Only a few "h" index variants make a nonredundant contribution to the "h" index; most of the variants correlate very highly with the "h" index. They presented the first metaanalysis of studies that computed correlations between the "h" index and variants of the "h" index that have been proposed and discussed in the literature. Thus, the study was not about the added value of the "h" index or "h" index variants to other bibliometric indices, e.g., total number of citations. They tested whether there is a generally high (or low) correlation between the "h" index and the variants. The metaanalysis included a total of 135 different bivariate correlation coefficients between the "h" index and an "h" index variant (such as the "g" index). In total, they analyzed 37 different "h" variants. Their results show, with an overall mean value between 0.8 and 0.9, there is a high correlation between the "h" index and the "h" index variants. According to Navon (2009), "high correlations indicate that despite the differences in how the metrics are calculated, there is too much redundancy in the information they yield." Even if the "actual" correlations might be higher than those claimed in the original papers introducing the new "h"-type indices due to systematic sampling selection effects, a mean correlation coefficient of between 0.8 and 0.9 is still high and might not justify the development of more and more "h" index variants. However, not all "h" index variants have a high correlation with the "h" index. Their results indicate that some "h" index variants have been developed that have a relatively low correlation with the "h" index, and it can be assumed that they can make a nonredundant contribution to the "h" index. These variants are mainly the MII (Sypsa & Hatzakis, 2009) and the "m" index (Bornmann, Mutz, & Daniel, 2008). For evaluative purposes, then, the "h" index could be combined with these "h" index variants to better depict research performance bibliometrically. (Contains 1 table.)

The goal of this analysis was to obtain local citation behavior data on undergraduates researching history, political science, and sociology papers. The study found that students cited books and journals even with the availability of web sources; however, usage varied by subject. References to specific websites' domains also varied across subject area. Most of the top journal titles that students referenced were online and locally owned. Students cited a broader range of journal titles than predicted by the Law of Scattering and cited titles across a wide array of subject areas. This data helped identify potential gaps in the library's collection and services. (Contains 7 tables.)

The purpose of this paper is to retrieve and study the highly cited papers as well as the correlation between the citation frequency and the download frequency of the 20 traditional Chinese medicine journals in China, in order to provide the guidance for improving the influence and academic quality of these journals. Bibliometric analyses were conducted on 1103 papers of 20 traditional Chinese medicine journals from 2011 to 2020 by retrieving for the China Academic Journal Network Publishing Database (CAJD) in China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI). SPSS 17.0 software was used to analyze the correlation between the citation frequency and the download frequency via conducting regression fitting and establishing the mathematical models. The results showed that the total citations of the 1103 papers were 93051 times and the average citations were 84.36 times per paper. The total downloads of the 1103 papers were 2058442 times, and the average downloads were 1866.22 times per paper. China Journal of Chinese Materia Medica ranked first according to the number of papers, total citations and total downloads. The citations of Journal of Chinese Medicinal Materials ranked first based on the number of citations per paper. One of Li's paper had been cited the most (983 times). There were 629 (57.03%) papers whose first author was from universities. The scopes of the first authors were distributed in 29 regions and 2 special administrative regions (Macao, Hong Kong) in China. The authors from Beijing published 283 (25.66%) papers, ranking number one. The number of papers supported by funds was 882 (79.96%). The research results of correlation showed that the citation frequency and the download frequency of the highly cited papers had a highly positive correlation from both journal and paper level for whether the sample data of journals was normally distributed or nonnormally distributed. The correlation coefficients of the 20 journals at journal level and that at paper level were 0.9765 and 0.6677, respectively. The correlation was better at journal level than that at paper level, while the optimal regression fitting was all cubic polynomial. Among the 1103 papers, there were 684 (62.01%) research papers and 419 (37.99%) review papers. The main citation period of the top 15 papers was from the 2nd year to the 6th year after publication, accounting for 78.39%. Papers on clinical therapeutics research, papers on the pharmacological effects and its mechanism of traditional Chinese medicine, and papers on traditional Chinese medicine and natural medicine were the main source of the highly cited papers of the traditional Chinese medicine journals. Editors of the journals should focus on the above-mentioned research areas to select manuscripts for exploiting the excellent sources extensively, while paying attention to review papers, focusing on national major or key projects, paying attention to network spreading, stabilizing authors with quality services, in order to improve the influence and the academic quality of journals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]