Related papers: Does Quantity Make a Difference? The importance of…
Is more always better? We address this question in the context of bibliometric indices that aim to assess the scientific impact of individual researchers by counting their number of highly cited publications. We propose a simple model in…
Citation metrics are becoming pervasive in the quantitative evaluation of scholars, journals and institutions. More then ever before, hiring, promotion, and funding decisions rely on a variety of impact metrics that cannot disentangle…
Ever more frequently, governments have decided to implement policy measures intended to foster and reward excellence in scientific research. This is in fact the intended purpose of national research assessment exercises. These are typically…
The present paper takes its place in the stream of studies that analyze the effect of interdisciplinarity on the impact of research output. Unlike previous studies, in this study the interdisciplinarity of the publications is not inferred…
The exponentially growing number of scientific papers stimulates a discussion on the interplay between quantity and quality in science. In particular, one may wonder which publication strategy may offer more chances of success: publishing…
The shift from individual effort to collaborative output has benefited science, with scientific work pursued collaboratively having increasingly led to more highly impactful research than that pursued individually. However, understanding of…
In recent years, the relationship of collaboration among scientists and the citation impact of papers have been frequently investigated. Most of the studies show that the two variables are closely related: an increasing collaboration…
Science has become more collaborative over the past years, a phenomenon that is related to the increase in the number of authors per paper and the emergence of interdisciplinary works featuring specialists of different fields. In such a…
In recent years there has been an increasingly pressing need for the evaluation of results from public sector research activity, particularly to permit the efficient allocation of ever scarcer resources. Many of the studies and evaluation…
Scientometers and sociologists of science have spilled much ink on the topic of peer review over the past twenty years, given its primordial role in a context marked by the exponential growth of scientific production and the proliferation…
Empirical evidence shows that co-authored publications achieve higher visibility and impact. The aim of the current work is to test for the existence of a similar correlation for Italian publications. We also verify if such correlation…
The pursuit of knowledge is the permanent goal of human beings. Scientific literature, as the major medium that carries knowledge between scientists, exhibits explosive growth during the last century. Despite the frequent use of many…
Researchers cite works for a variety of reasons, including some having nothing to do with acknowledging influence. The distribution of different citation types in the literature, and which papers attract which types, is poorly understood.…
Classifying researchers according to the quality of their published work rather than the quantity is a curtail issue. We attempt to introduce a new formula of the percentage range to be used for evaluating qualitatively the researchers'…
The number of citations is a widely used metric to evaluate the scientific credit of papers, scientists and journals. However, it does happen that a paper with fewer citations from prestigious scientists is of higher influence than papers…
Co-authored articles tend to be more cited in many academic fields, but is this because they tend to be higher quality or is it an audience effect: increased awareness through multiple author networks? We address this unknown with the…
We examine the tension between academic impact - the volume of citations received by publications - and scientific disruption. Intuitively, one would expect disruptive scientific work to be rewarded by high volumes of citations and,…
Recent research has found that select scientists have a disproportional share of highly cited papers. Researchers reasoned that this could not have happened if success in science was random and introduced a hidden parameter Q, or talent, to…
Accurate measurement of research productivity should take account of both the number of co-authors of every scientific work and of the different contributions of the individuals. For researchers in the life sciences, common practice is to…
Academic success is distributed unequally; a few top scientists receive the bulk of attention, citations, and resources. However, do these ``superstars" foster leadership in scientific innovation? We introduce three information-theoretic…