Anatomy of the top 1% most highly cited publications: An empirical comparison of two approaches

Author:

Perianes-Rodriguez Antonio1ORCID,Gomez-Nuñez Antonio J.1ORCID,Olmeda-Gomez Carlos1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Departamento de Biblioteconomia y Documentacion, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Getafe, Spain

Abstract

Abstract Scientific excellence is an ongoing object of quantitative analysis of science and technology literature. The most commonly adopted of the various criteria for such quantification is to define highly cited papers as the ones lying in the first percentile (top 1%) of citation counts. Wagner and colleagues have recently proposed a new method in which citation counts are determined as a whole, irrespective of discipline. This study analyzes the practical implications of the new approach compared to the traditional procedure in which papers are ranked bearing in mind the scientific field involved, with particular attention to the consequences for rankings by country and discipline. The results show that the new methodology favors countries with a predominance of polytechnical scientific production, technological development, and innovation and lowers the rank of countries where the social sciences, humanities, and basic research account for the lion’s share of output. An analysis of worldwide production confirms the growth of scientific output in technical and technological disciplines.

Funder

Comunidad de Madrid

Publisher

MIT Press

Reference32 articles.

1. An approach for efficient online identification of the top-k percent most cited documents in large sets of Web of Science documents;Ahlgren;ISSI Newsletter,2014

2. The skewness of science in 219 sub-fields and a number of aggregates;Albarran;Scientometrics,2011

3. References made and citations received by scientific articles;Albarran;Journal of the American Society for Information Science,2011

4. Field-level differences in paper and author characteristics across all fields of science in Web of Science, 2000–2020;Andersen;Quantitative Science Studies,2023

5. Which percentile-based approach should be preferred for calculating normalized citation impact values? An empirical comparison of five approaches including a newly developed citation-rank approach (P100);Bornmann;Journal of Informetrics,2013

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3