3. Analyze Search results
to find interesting journals
to identify key researchers / institutes
Scopus or Web of Science
use it to set up alerts
contact people e.g. on ResearchGate
8. Use BrowZine to access Scholarly Journals
Access your key scholarly journals on
mobile or PC
Journal subscribed by WageningenUR
Library and OA journals
Personalised bookshelf
Sync across devices
Alerts for new content
Integration with Endnote and
Mendeley
Export to Dropbox, Evernote, Google
Drive
Free!
8
BrowZine Video
10. Motives for publishing
Edge, P., Martin, F., Fao, S. R., & Manning, N. (2011).
Researcher Attitudes and Behaviour Towards the “ Openness ” of Research Outputs in
Agriculture and Related Fields.
12. Choosing the right journal to publish
Many factors influence journal selection
● Journal scope/Intended audience
● Editorial board/standing
● Open Access
● The speed of reviewing and publication
● Acceptance/Rejection rate
● Journal circulation
● Coverage in A&I databases (bibliographies)
● Journal performance
14. Open Access
OA publishing e.g. PLoS, BMC and Sage Open
Self-archiving in repositories e.g. Wageningen Yield
(WaY)
SHERPA/RoMEO: Publisher copyright policies & self-
archiving http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/
Directory of open access journals DOAJ (currently ca.
10,000 journals)
Be aware of predatory OA publishers Beall's List
18. Rejection / acceptance rates
Sugimoto, C. R., Larivière, V., Ni, C., & Cronin, B. (2013). Journal acceptance rates: A cross-disciplinary analysis of
variability and relationships with journal measures. Journal of Informetrics, 7(4), 897–906. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2013.08.007
19. Journal circulation
Compare e.g.
● “Agricultural Systems”
● "Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
of the United States of America"
20. journal reviews
share your experience with the scientific review process
of journals
duration of manuscript handling phases
● duration first review round
● total handling time accepted manuscripts
● decision time immediate rejection
characteristics of peer review process
● average number of review reports
● average number of review rounds
20
26. Networking is important
Start early, make use of Social Networking tools
● Facebook
● LinkedIn
● Twitter
● Social networks for scientists
● Academia.edu, Researchgate.net
28. Advertise yourself
Cite your previous articles!
Be active at conferences
Cooperate with other people/research groups
Write, or expand, articles in the Wikipedia, refer to your
thesis.
Blog or tweet about your research and thesis research
Make use of social networking tools (LinkedIn,
Researchgate.net, Mendeley etc.)
Create author’s identifiers (ScopusID, Researcher ID,
ORCID)
29. Claim your publications
ResearcherID (Web of Science)
Scopus Author ID (Scopus)
Google Scholar Citations
Enserink, M. (2009). Scientific Publishing: Are You Ready to Become a Number? Science,
323(5922): 1662-1664 http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.323.5922.1662
ORCID
● http://orcid.scopusfeedback.com/
30. Interested in new Scholarly Communications tools?
http://innoscholcomm.silk.co/
31. What's in a name
On the cover:
● Arina Schrier
First first title page:
● A.P. Schrier-Uyl
Second title page:
● Adriana Pia Uyl
In here own publication list
● A. Uyl
● A. Uijl
● A.P. Schrier Uyl
32. This also applies to the names of groups
Environmental Policy Group, Department of Social Sciences, Wageningen University
Environmental Policy Group, Wageningen University
Environmental Policy Group, Wageningen University and Research Centre
Environmental Policy Group, Wageningen UR
33. Get your affiliation right
For the university:
Chair group + Wageningen University
Plant Production Systems Group, Wageningen University,
P.O. box ..., 6700 HA Wageningen, The Netherlands
For the institutes:
Institute + Wageningen University & Research Centre
Alterra, Wageningen University & Research Centre, P.O.
box ..., 6700 HA Wageningen, The Netherlands
34. Some other options to make you articles
effective
Apart from doing good research and writing
well, that is
35. Collaboration with private sector effective
Kamalski, J., & Aisati, M. h. (2013). International comparative benchmark of Dutch research
performance in TKI themes: Food Safety research. A report prepared by Elsevier for Agentschap NL.
37. University-industry collaboration and impact
"The average scientific impact of university-
industry papers is significantly above that of
both university-only papers and industry-only
papers"
Lebeau, L. M., Laframboise, M. C., Larivière, V., & Gingras, Y. (2008). The effect of university-industry
collaboration on the scientific impact of publications: The Canadian case, 1980-2005. Research
Evaluation, 17(3), 227-232. http://dx.doi.org/10.3152/095820208x331685
39. More co-authors?
A: strong or definite predictor;
B: Weak predictor or predictive power dependent on the model
40. References?
Recent article! N. Onodera and F. Yoshikane, “Factors affecting citation rates of research articles,”
J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. Jun. 2014.
A: strong or definite predictor; B: Weak predictor or predictive power dependent on the model;
C: Not significant or negative predictor
42. Self citations
The model [...] implies that external citations are
enhanced by self-citations, so that we have the
“chain reaction:” Larger size leads to more self-
citations, which lead to more external citations.
van Raan, A. F. J. (2008). Self-citation as an impact-reinforcing mechanism in the
science system. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and
Technology 59(10): 1631-1643.
43. More articles per research project?
Publishing more articles results in higher citation counts if
the articles provide sufficient substantive content to
other researchers.
● Beware of the ethical standards
● Bornmann looked at total citations, not to relative
impact
Bornmann, L. & H.-D. Daniel (2007). Multiple publication on a single research study:
Does it pay? The influence of number of research articles on total citation counts in
biomedicine. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and
Technology, 58(8): 1100-1107 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.20531
44. Publish your data!
Henneken et al. (2011) "articles with links to data result
in higher citation rates than articles without such links"
http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.3618
Piwowar et al. (2007) "Sharing detailed research data is
associated with increased citation rate
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0000308
Library assists in curating datasets:
www.wageningenur.nl/datamanagement
46. Web of Science
Search:
● Articles are found based on Authors, Addresses,
etc.
● For each article Times cited is presented
Cited reference search:
● Searches in the reference lists of records
● Not all of your articles are found. Non-cited articles
are missing
48. How do we compare numbers
Scientist Z. Math has a publication from 2003 with 17
citations
Scientist M. Biology has a publication from 2009 with 24
citations
50. Baselines for Molecular Biology
0
100
200
300
400
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Years after publication
Cumulativeno.citations
Baseline
top 10%
top 1%
51. Citation enhanced A&I databases
Web of Science
● Based on ± 12000 journals
● Metrics: Impact factor
● Baselines per ‘discipline’
(ESI)
● Analysis tools (Insight)
Scopus
● Based on ± 19000 journals
+ other publication types
● Metrics: SNIP and SJR
● Baselines + analysis tool
(Scival)
Google Scholar
(http://scholar.google.com)
● Based on unknown journals +
many other things
● No baselines
There are other citation enhanced
databases:
• PsychInfo,
• SciFinder (Chemical abstracts)
• ArXiv (Physics)
• Spires (high energy physics)
• Citeseer (ICT)
53. Essential Science Indicators (ESI)
Analytical database, covering 10 years + current year
building
Comparisons between Countries, Institutes, Scientists
and Journals
Hot papers / Highly cited papers
Research fronts
Baselines
54. Steps in a citation analysis
1. Look up the citation data (Web of Science)
2. Matching Journal(s) with appropriate research fields
(Essential Science Indicators)
3. Collect baseline data (Essential Science Indicators)
4. Calculate the relative impact
55. Bibliometric indicators: An example
Kroes-Nijboer, A; Venema, P; Bouman, J; van der Linden, E
(2009) The Critical Aggregation Concentration of beta-
Lactoglobulin-Based Fibril Formation. Food Biophysics 4(2):59-
63.
● Citations from WoS: 12
Journal: Food Biophysics
● Categorised by ESI in Agricultural Sciences
Baseline data for Agricultural Sciences.
● Article from 2009 in Agricultural Sciences:
● On average: 9.19 citations; top 10%: 23 citations; top
1%: 59 citations
Relative Impact: 12/9.19 = 1.40 Values June 2015
60. H-index
Balance between productivity
and citedness
To rule out the effect of one
or two highly cited papers
Applicable to authors,
journals, research groups,
compounds, subjects etc.
But there are some serious
doubts about robustness
Waltman, L. & N. J. van Eck (2011). The inconsistency of
the h-index. Journal of the American Society for
Information Science and Technology 63(2):406-415
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.21678
64. Journal Performance Indicators
Journal performance indicators are based on citations to
articles
Journal Citation Reports (JCR)
● a.o. standard Journal Impact Factors and 5-year
Impact Factors
Scopus Journal Analyzer (SJA)
● a.o. SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) and Source
Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP)
● Also available on http://journalmetrics.com/
65. Journal Citation Reports (JCR)
Reports three measures
Impact factor
Immediacy Index
Cited half life
Adapted from: Amin, M and Mabe, M. (2000) Impact factors: use
and abuse. Perspectives in Publishing, No. 1, 6 pp.
http://www.elsevier.com/framework_editors/pdfs/Perspectives1.pdf
67. Selecting journals on the basis of IF
Word of warning
● Our opinion: Be careful when using Journal Impact
factors to judge the performance of a group or
individual scientist
● Used for NWO grant applications and Tenure track
at Wageningen UR
Opthof, T. (1997) Sense and nonsense about he impact factor. Cardiovascular Research,
33(1): 1-7 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0008-6363(96)00215-5
73. effect of publication strategy
73
%Q1 and Relative Impact (RI) as function of time for WageningenUR output
74. Interpretation of RI for small groups
With 10-50 publications per year
RI ≤ 0.8 : below world average impact
0.8 < RI ≤ 1.2 : world average impact
1.2 < RI ≤ 2.0 : above world average impact
2.0 < RI ≤ 3.0 : very good average impact
RI > 3.0 : excellent average impact