General Principles of Intellectual Property: Concepts of Intellectual Proper...
Bibliometrics in the library Wageningen UR Library experience
1. Bibliometrics in the library
Wageningen UR library experience
at Milton Keynes, March 5th 2013
Wouter Gerritsma
2. Contents
Research Evaluation in the Netherlands
CRIS & Repository @Wageningen
Bibliometrics module
Research questions
Developments in the marketplace
Lessons learned
Some advice
3. Research assessment in the Netherlands
Supervised by VSNU/QANU
● 6 year cycle for external peer reviews
● After 3 year midterm review
● Unit of analysis (in Wageningen): Graduate schools
Citation analyses are not stipulated in the current
Standard Evaluation Protocol (SEP).
● This has become mandatory at Wageningen UR, als
at the social sciences department and for the
research institutes
4. SEP criteria
quality (including international academic reputation and
PhD training)
productivity (the relationship between input and output)
societal relevance (including valorisation)
vitality and feasibility (the ability to react adequately to
important changes in the environment).
5. Metis, our CRIS
Metis is a Current Research Information System (CRIS)
Data entry at chair group level
Quality control by the library
● Locating full text (uploading to e-depot)
● Maintenance journal lists
● Document type assignation and inclusion of DOI's
Compulsory output registration
● Research assessments only on metis registered
publications
Information on all labour relations of faculty and staff
Information on all projects
6. Repository or Institutional Bibliography?
Wageningen Yield (WaY) is the repository of Wageningen
UR
● Synchronized overnight with the updates from Metis
● WaY contains metadata descriptions of all
Wageningen UR publication output, >190.000 items
● WaY is our OA repository, >40.000 items
● WaY is our tool for citation analyses, >22.000
publications
● Advanced bibliometrics
9. How do we compare numbers
Scientist Z. Math has a publication from 2002 with 17 citations
Scientist M. Biology has a publication from 2008 with 32 citations
12. For a single publication
Zee, F.P.v.d., G. Lettinga & J.A. Field (2001) Azo dye
decolourisation by anaerobic granular sludge.
Chemosphere 44:1169-1176.
● Citations from WoS: 94
Journal: Chemosphere
Categorised by ESI in Environment/Ecology
Baseline data for Environment/Ecology.
● Article from 2001 in Environment/ecology:
● On average: 19.36 citations;
● Top 10%: 44 citations; Top1%: 141 citations
Relative Impact: 94 / 19.36 = 4.9
van Veller, M.G.P et al. (2010). Bibliometric analyses on repository contents
for the evaluation of research at Wageningen UR. In: Qualitative and
Quantitative Methods in Libraries: Theory and Applications. A. Katsirikou and
C. H. Skiadas. p.19-26. http://edepot.wur.nl/7266.
17. Advanced bibliometric indicators
Follow Moed (1995) as closely as possible; but.....
Web of Science is used for citation data
● We can’t make corrections for self citations
Essential Science Indicators for baseline data (World
average, Top 10% and Top 1%)
● Limited number of research fields (22)
BUT:
We can determine the representativeness of the citation
analysis!
18. Representativeness
Publication type #Pubs
Refereed articles 324
Non-refereed articles 7
Books 1
Refereed book chapters 36
Non-refereed book chapters 13
PhD Theses 45
Conference papers 137
Total Academic Publications 563
19. Representativeness
Publication type #Pubs WoS Repr.
Refereed articles 324 288 89%
Non-refereed articles 7
Google Scholar 1
Refereed book chapters 36
Non-refereed book chapters 13
PhD Theses 45
Conference papers 137
Total Academic Publications 563
20. Prospective versus Retrospective analyses
CWTS performs normally Prospective analyses
● Current researchers, 10 years back
● Missing some retired bigshots!
You need to keep track of the actual publication record
for retrospective analyses. This is difficult for external
parties.
● Head-tail problems
No research on differences in outcomes of prospective
versus retrospective analyses
● We need research in this area!
21. Self citations
CWTS performs corrections for self citations
Correcting for self citations in Web of Science is
incomplete
● As long as the RsearcherID is not fully introduced
this will be impossible in WoS
Correcting for Self citations in Scopus is possible
Belgian research has shown that it has not a
tremendous influence
Glänzel, W., K. Debackere, B. Thijs & A. Schubert (2006). A concise review on the
role of author self-citations in information science, bibliometrics and science policy.
Scientometrics, 67(2): 263-277 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0098-9
23. Web of Science
Citation data (you can include citations from other
databases on Wok)
API to download citation data
Baselines from ESI
InCites more advanced, but where do you manage the
information?
Author disambiguation is a major problem
24. Scopus
Citation data obtainable through an API
Benchmarking with SciVal Strata, no API yet
Not yet fully developed, major changes coming up.
25. CWTS monitor
So far the most elegant and comprehensive citation
analysis tool (still in beta) to be launched soon.
Citation database agnostic!
26. Google Scholar
Very popular by social scientists and arts & humanities
Have you ever retrieved more than 1000 results from
any Google product?
Google Scholar can't count
Harzing's Publish or Perish software does a decent job.
27. Altmetrics
Quickly developing
● ScienceCard
● Total-Impact
● Readermeter
● Microsoft
Academic Search
● etc.
We look into inclusion
on top of the WaY for
article level metrics
Wouters, P. & R. Costas (2012). Users, narcissism and control.
Utrecht, NL: SURFfoundation. http://www.surffoundation.nl/
en/publicaties/Pages/Users_narcissism_control.aspx.
28. CRIS and Bibliometric analysis tools
If you maintain a CRIS, why should you maintain your
researchers and organisation structure in a bibliometrics
analysis tool as well?
Do commercial packages have ways to publicize the
results for scrutiny by the researchers?
30. Matching Wageningen Yield and WoS
WoS: 9577 articles
WaY: 10933 articles
Missing in Way:
807 articles
Missing in WoS:
1159 articles
1161 peer reviewed
articles not in ISI journals
It is a lot of hard work to keep track of all publications. The library
can a should do a better job than commercial service providers
32. Why in the library?
Library is the functional manager of Metis / WaY because
of wide experience with bibliographic metadata
Library manages contracts with publisher(s) of external
databases that are being used
Library has experience in developing and maintaining
large databases
Library has ample experience in searching complicated
databases such as Web of Science
33. Advantage of using Metis / WaY
Improvements in publication lists, etc. recorded
Knowledge of, and experience with bibliometric analyses
is better institutionalized
More visibility through Open Access management
Clarity / transparency for researchers
Analysis of a single unit within the institute offers
advantages for the organization as a whole
Better understanding of our own researchers
● We know where they publish
● We know what they cite
● We know something about their impact
34. Raising library awareness
Improvement of the (metadata) quality in the repository
Quality has lead to compulsory registration for research
assessments
Presentations for research groups during the preparation
for peer reviews
Presentations based on detailed studies of single groups
Library gives advice on elements for publication
strategies for groups and individuals
● there is a huge demand for these workshops
36. My advise
Start small, gain experience
Show you can pull it off
Be transparent!
How much is your university spending research
evaluations?
Invest those resources in your own systems