Screening the most highly cited papers in longitudinal bibliometric studies and systematic literature reviews of a research field or journal: Widespread used metrics vs a percentile citation-based approach

• Type: Article in International Scientific Journal
• Date: 2021

Authors

Pech, G (Author) Other; Catarina Delgado (Author) FEP

Journal

Title: Journal of Informetrics

Vol. 15

ISSN: 1751-1577

Publisher: Elsevier

Indexing

ISI Web of Knowledge - 9 Citations

Scopus - 14 Citations

Other information

Authenticus ID: P-00T-TFS

DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2021.101161

Abstract (EN): There is a literature gap regarding the period representativeness bias associated with sample selection in longitudinal bibliometric studies. The purpose of this paper is to analyse and compare, in terms of period representativeness, the common methods used for selecting a sample of the highly impactful papers in a field/ journal. Using 92 593 papers (Information Science & Library Science area, 1977-2016), we compared, in terms of the number of papers/year, samples of the 100 most impactful papers, obtained with different selection options. We repeated the analysis also for Top500, Top2000, and Top20000. This study shows that the frequently used metrics to compare the impact of papers and to select a sample of spacing diaeresis most impactful papers p spacing diaeresis ublished in each year and each field may privilege specific periods while neglecting others. The main result of our study is that the percentile citation-based method reduces this y spacing diaeresis ear of publicationr spacing diaeresis epresentativeness bias. This paper draws attention to the importance of the sample selection, in bibliometric studies, and to the period representativeness bias associated with different choices to select the spacing diaeresis most impactful papers. spacing diaeresis

Language: English

Type (Professor's evaluation): Scientific

No. of pages: 16