Co-author Weighting in Bibliometric Methodology and Subfields of a Scientific Discipline

作     者：Lawrence Smolinsky Aaron J Lercher 

作者机构：Department of MathematicsLouisiana State UniversityBaton RougeLA 70803USA Middleton LibraryLouisiana State UniversityBaton RougeLA 70803USA 

出 版 物：《Journal of Data and Information Science》 (数据与情报科学学报（英文版）)

年 卷 期：2020年第5卷第3期

页      面：84-96页

核心收录：

学科分类：0303[法学-社会学] 1205[管理学-图书情报与档案管理] 12[管理学] 1204[管理学-公共管理] 0302[法学-政治学] 1201[管理学-管理科学与工程(可授管理学、工学学位)] 07[理学] 120502[管理学-情报学] 0812[工学-计算机科学与技术（可授工学、理学学位）] 0702[理学-物理学] 

主　　题：Citation analysis Bibliometrics Research evaluation Co-author 

摘      要：Purpose: To give a theoretical framework to measure the relative impact of bibliometric methodology on the subfields of a scientific discipline, and how that impact depends on the method of evaluation used to credit individual scientists with citations and publications. The authors include a study of the discipline of physics to illustrate the method. Indicators are introduced to measure the proportion of a credit space awarded to a subfield or a set of ***/methodology/approach: The theoretical methodology introduces the notion of credit spaces for a discipline. These quantify the total citation or publication credit accumulated by the scientists in the discipline. One can then examine how the credit is divided among the subfields. The design of the physics study uses the American Physical Society print journals to assign subdiscipline classifications to articles and gather citation, publication, and author information. Credit spaces for the collection of Physical Review Journal articles are computed as a proxy for ***: There is a substantial difference in the value or impact of a specific subfield depending on the credit system employed to credit individual *** limitations: Subfield classification information is difficult to obtain. In the illustrative physics study, subfields are treated in groups designated by the Physical Review journals. While this collection of articles represents a broad part of the physics literature, it is not all the literature nor a random *** implications: The method of crediting individual scientists has consequences beyond the individual and affects the perceived impact of whole subfields and institutions. Originality/value: The article reveals the consequences of bibliometric methodology on subfields of a disciple by introducing a systematic theoretical framework for measuring the consequences.