Tag Archives: bibliometrics

To distinguish between an elephant and a rabbit: Citizen bibliometrics in biomedicine and economics

(5 September 2017) In recent years there has been an increasing interest in how evaluation systems and resource allocation models affect research. A central question is how an increased focus on performance that is quantifiable affects researchers’ practices and priorities. A number of documented and possible effects have been identified on a more general level […]


Read More...


Ruth’s Rankings 29: From Bibliometrics to Geopolitics: An Overview of Global Rankings and the Geopolitics of Higher Education edited by Ellen Hazelkorn

“…regardless of our views about their merit or otherwise, rankings matter” (Hazelkorn 2017, pg. 1) “Universities…are obsessed with gaining status in one or more national or global rankings…They should quit now”. (Altbach &Hazelkorn, 2017) By Ruth A. Pagell* (1 September 2017) Our first columns in 2014 introduced bibliometrics. We then presented the various rankings, their […]


Read More...


Microsoft Academic is on the verge of becoming a bibliometric superpower

(19 June 2017) Last year, the new Microsoft Academic service was launched. Sven E. Hug and Martin P. Brändle look at how it compares with more established competitors such as Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science. While there are reservations about the availability of instructions for novice users, Microsoft Academic has impressive semantic search […]


Read More...


Ruth’s Rankings 24: Malaysia Higher Education – “Soaring Upward” or Not?

By Ruth A. Pagell* (28 March 2017) Ruth’s Rankings 24 is based on Malaysian news articles that chronicle the changes in funding to Malaysia’s premier research universities following the release of the Ministry of Education’s Malaysia Education Blueprint 2015-2025 (Higher Education) – MEB – in 2015. In preparing the article, I read many news articles […]


Read More...


Google Scholar is a serious alternative to Web of Science

(16 March 2016) Many bibliometricians and university administrators remain wary of Google Scholar citation data, preferring “the gold standard” of Web of Science instead. Anne-Wil Harzing, who developed the Publish or Perish software that uses Google Scholar data, sets out to challenge some of the misconceptions about this data source and explain why it offers […]


Read More...


Ruth’s Rankings 17: Wikipedia and Google Scholar as Sources for University Rankings – Influence and popularity and open bibliometrics

By Ruth A. Pagell* (5 February 2016) In early December 2015, MIT’s Technology Review provided a summary of a new paper on using data from Wikipedia to rank the world’s most INFLUENTIAL universities.  A month later, ACCESS posted the abstract for another paper that introduced Wikiometrics, also using data from Wikipedia to rank universities.  In […]


Read More...


The Evolution of Impact Indicators: From bibliometrics to altmetrics

(21 September 2015)  Altmetric has a new free-to-download eBook resource, co-written by Scholastica and Altmetric: The Evolution of Impact Indicators: From bibliometrics to altmetrics As scholarly workflows and academic communication patterns evolve to meet the needs of today’s digital researcher, a huge shift in the way we think about and identify indicators of broader impacts is […]


Read More...


Altmetrics, bibliometrics, research impact focus of new ACRL publication

(1 May 2015, Chicago) The Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) announces the release of Meaningful Metrics: A 21st Century Librarian’s Guide to Bibliometrics, Altmetrics, and Research Impact by Robin Chin Roemer and Rachel Borchardt. What does it mean to have meaningful research metrics in today’s complex higher education landscape? This highly engaging and […]


Read More...


Ruth’s Rankings 9: Expanding the Measurement of Science: From Citations to Web Visibility to Tweets

By Ruth A. Pagell* (31 March 2015) “…there is a growing movement within the scientific establishment to better measure and reward all the different ways that people contribute to the messy and complex process of scientific progress.”  Arbesman (2012), Wired. The rankings we examined in Ruth’s Rankings 5, 6, 7 and 8 are grounded in […]


Read More...


Ruth’s Rankings 5. Comparing Times Higher Education (THE) and QS Rankings

By Ruth A. Pagell* (26 November 2014) Which university is #1 in the world in 2014/2015?  Massachusetts Institute of Technology?  California Institute of Technology?  Harvard University? Cambridge University? Princeton? In Asia? University of Tokyo?  National University of Singapore?  University of Hong Kong? 1 Read on and find out who the top universities are and why […]


Read More...


Ruth’s Rankings 4. The Big Two: Thomson Reuters and Scopus

By Ruth A. Pagell1 (13 October 2014)  Ruth’s Rankings 3 introduced the metrics used in rankings.  In this article, we look at the information companies who provide the underlying data. As of October 2014, UlrichsWeb Global Serials Directory lists over 145,000 scholarly academic journals of which about 50,000 are not in English.   Scopus estimates that there […]


Read More...


Ruth’s Rankings 3. Bibliometrics: What We Count and How We Count

By Ruth A. Pagell1 (4 September 2014) Looking back at the Asian university rankings in Table 1 in Ruth’s Rankings 1, each top 10 list is somewhat different.  All of these rankings include some quantitative research metrics, ranging from a high of 100% for the ranking to a low of less than 20%.  In order to […]


Read More...


Ruth’s Rankings 1. Introduction: Unwinding the Web of International Research Rankings

By Ruth A. Pagell* (5 July 2014) I find rankings fascinating.  I wrote my first article about rankings over 25 years ago when I was trying to sort out different listings of “biggest” U.S. companies and  moved on to researching biggest companies world-wide.  Who was biggest varied among different sources based on different criteria. Two […]


Read More...


New online guides from ANU library provide valuable research assistance

(13 December 2013)  The Australian National University Library has published two new online guides, Bibliometrics and citation tracking and How to use NVivo, that have been produced with the ANU research community in mind. Bibliometrics and citation tracking explains citation tracking, and introduces a range of tools to measure the impact of research and journals. […]


Read More...