Skip Nav Destination
Close Modal
Update search
NARROW
Format
Journal
Date
Availability
1-2 of 2
Paul Donner
Close
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account
Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Sort by
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Quantitative Science Studies (2020) 1 (2): 551–564.
Published: 01 June 2020
Abstract
View article
PDF
A perennial problem in bibliometrics is the appropriate distribution of authorship credit for coauthored publications. Several credit allocation methods and formulas have been introduced, but there has been little empirical validation as to which method best reflects the typical contributions of coauthors. This paper presents a validation of credit allocation methods using a new data set of author-provided percentage contribution figures obtained from the coauthored publications in cumulative PhD theses by authors from three countries that contain contribution statements. The comparison of allocation schemes shows that harmonic counting performs best and arithmetic and geometric counting also perform well, while fractional counting and first author counting perform relatively poorly.
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Quantitative Science Studies (2020) 1 (1): 150–170.
Published: 01 February 2020
Abstract
View article
PDF
The present study is an evaluation of three frequently used institution name disambiguation systems. The Web of Science normalized institution names and Organization Enhanced system and the Scopus Affiliation ID system are tested against a complete, independent institution disambiguation system for a sample of German public sector research organizations. The independent system is used as the gold standard in the evaluations that we perform. We study the coverage of the disambiguation systems and, in particular, the differences in a number of commonly used bibliometric indicators. The key finding is that for the sample institutions, the studied systems provide bibliometric indicator values that have only a limited accuracy. Our conclusion is that for any use with policy implications, additional data cleaning for disambiguating affiliation data is recommended.