The value and credits of n-authors publications

被引:11
作者
Bornmann, Lutz [1 ]
Osorio, Antonio [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Max Planck Soc Munich MPG, Munich, Germany
[2] Univ Rovira & Virgili, Dept Econ, Tarragona, Spain
[3] CREIP, Reus, Spain
关键词
Co-authorship; Counting methods; Publication value; Axiomatic analysis; Bibliometrics; SCIENTIFIC IMPACT; BIBLIOMETRIC RANKINGS; COLLABORATION; CONSEQUENCES; PRODUCTIVITY; INDICATORS; ALLOCATION; CITATIONS; LEVEL; INDEX;
D O I
10.1016/j.joi.2019.03.001
中图分类号
TP39 [计算机的应用];
学科分类号
081203 ; 0835 ;
摘要
Collaboration among researchers is becoming increasingly common, which raises a large number of scientometrics questions for which there is not a clear and generally accepted answer. For instance, what value should be given to a two-author or three-author publication with respect to a single-author publication? This paper uses axiomatic analysis and proposes a practical method to compute the expected value of an n-authors publication that takes into consideration the added value induced by collaboration in contexts in which there is no prior or ex-ante information about the publication's potential merits or scientific impact. The only information required is the number of authors. We compared the obtained theoretical values with the empirical values based on a large dataset from the Web of Science database. We found that the theoretical values are very close to the empirical values for some disciplines, but not for all. This observation provides support in favor of the method proposed in this paper. We expect that our findings can help researchers and decision-makers to choose more effective and fair counting methods that take into account the benefits of collaboration. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:540 / 554
页数:15
相关论文
共 60 条
[1]   The importance of accounting for the number of co-authors and their order when assessing research performance at the individual level in the life sciences [J].
Abramo, Giovanni ;
D'Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea ;
Rosati, Francesco .
JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, 2013, 7 (01) :198-208
[2]   Further axiomatizations of Egghe's g-index [J].
Adachi, Tsuyoshi ;
Kongo, Takumi .
JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, 2015, 9 (04) :839-844
[3]   A new author's productivity index: p-index [J].
Assimakis, N. ;
Adam, M. .
SCIENTOMETRICS, 2010, 85 (02) :415-427
[4]   Measuring impact in research evaluations: a thorough discussion of methods for, effects of and problems with impact measurements [J].
Bornmann, Lutz .
HIGHER EDUCATION, 2017, 73 (05) :775-787
[5]   Methods for the generation of normalized citation impact scores in bibliometrics: Which method best reflects the judgements of experts? [J].
Bornmann, Lutz ;
Marx, Werner .
JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, 2015, 9 (02) :408-418
[6]   A multilevel meta-analysis of studies reporting correlations between the h index and 37 different h index variants [J].
Bornmann, Lutz ;
Mutz, Ruediger ;
Hug, Sven E. ;
Daniel, Hans-Dieter .
JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, 2011, 5 (03) :346-359
[7]   Consistent bibliometric rankings of authors and of journals [J].
Bouyssou, D. ;
Marchant, T. .
JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, 2010, 4 (03) :365-378
[8]   Ranking authors using fractional counting of citations: An axiomatic approach [J].
Bouyssou, Denis ;
Marchant, Thierry .
JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, 2016, 10 (01) :183-199
[9]   An axiomatic approach to bibliometric rankings and indices [J].
Bouyssou, Denis ;
Marchant, Thierry .
JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, 2014, 8 (03) :449-477
[10]   Bibliometric rankings of journals based on Impact Factors: An axiomatic approach [J].
Bouyssou, Denis ;
Marchant, Thierry .
JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, 2011, 5 (01) :75-86