Send us a link
Citation counts are not purely a reflection of scientific merit and the impact factor is, in fact, auto-correlated.
When a commercial publisher re-uses images from your blog without permission or attribution.
With citation indexes being routinely questioned, ‘alternative metrics’ could gain ground as a new indicator of research success. But can they be trusted?
Paper showing that doubling the word frequency of an average abstract increases citations by 0.70% and that journals which publish papers whose abstracts are shorter and contain more frequently used words receive slightly more citations per paper.
The total number of papers published by researchers during their early career period (first fifteen years) has increased in recent decades, but so has their average number of co-authors.
How do retractions influence the scholarly impact of retracted papers, authors, and institutions; and how does this influence propagate to the wider academic community through scholarly associations?
A review on the open citation advantage, media attention for publicly available research, collaborative possibilities, and special funding opportunities to show how open practices can give researchers a competitive advantage.
Tweets of articles from Cell, Nature and Science journals all resulted in 2.166 more times clicks on the journal title rather than the anonymized links.
To promote and reward collaboration we’re developing a “C-score” that measures the quality and quantity of collaborators’ contributions to group efforts.,
This paper shows how bibliometric assessment can be implemented at individual level.
An intelligent machine learning framework for scientific evaluation of researchers may help decision makers to better allocate the available funding to the distinguished scientists through providing fair comparative results, regardless of the career age of the researchers.
If we want to embed equality and diversity in research culture, any future use of metrics to assess research must not adversely affect specific groups or researchers.
It’s rare for scientists to get much systematic or public recognition for their reviewing efforts
A broad base of quantitative information on the U.S. and international science and engineering enterprise.
This paper presents Wikiometrics: the derivation of metrics and indicators from Wikipedia.
One of the strongest beliefs in scholarly publishing is that journals seeking a high impact factor should be highly selective. There is evidence showing this is wrong.
Scientists debate the merits of deleting journal names from their publication lists.
What academic research caught the public imagination in 2015? Altmetric has pulled together our annual list of the research that has attracted the most online attention in the past year.
PaperRank service will allow researchers to rate papers online in bid to accelerate and open up process.
A paper proposing an index (namely, the L-index) that does not depend on the number of publications, accounts for different co-author contributions and age of publications, and scales from 0.0 to 9.9.
ORCID has announced the launch of Auto-Update functionality, in collaboration with Crossref and DataCite.
The objective of this research is to describe the journal coverage of those two databases and to assess whether some field, publishing country and language are over or underrepresented.
As an institution, science is not fond of privilege. Success in science is supposed to be the result of merit - hard work, tenacity and, to some degree, sheer luck - not nepotism, favoritism, or entitlement.
Once a paper has its perceived value raised by being cited, it’s likely to get cited again.
