scispace - formally typeset
Journal IssueDOI

Libcitations: A measure for comparative assessment of book publications in the humanities and social sciences

Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
The libcitation count is presented, a count of the libraries holding a given book, as reported in a national or international union catalog, for book-oriented fields and a match-up between the departments of history, philosophy, and political science at the University of New South Wales and theUniversity of Sydney in Australia is imagined.
Abstract
Bibliometric measures for evaluating research units in the book-oriented humanities and social sciences are underdeveloped relative to those available for journal-oriented science and technology. We therefore present a new measure designed for book-oriented fields: the “libcitation count.” This is a count of the libraries holding a given book, as reported in a national or international union catalog. As librarians decide what to acquire for the audiences they serve, they jointly constitute an instrument for gauging the cultural impact of books. Their decisions are informed by knowledge not only of audiences but also of the book world (e.g., the reputations of authors and the prestige of publishers). From libcitation counts, measures can be derived for comparing research units. Here, we imagine a match-up between the departments of history, philosophy, and political science at the University of New South Wales and the University of Sydney in Australia. We chose the 12 books from each department that had the highest libcitation counts in the Libraries Australia union catalog during 2000 to 2006. We present each book's raw libcitation count, its rank within its Library of Congress (LC) class, and its LC-class normalized libcitation score. The latter is patterned on the item-oriented field normalized citation score used in evaluative bibliometrics. Summary statistics based on these measures allow the departments to be compared for cultural impact. Our work has implications for programs such as Excellence in Research for Australia and the Research Assessment Exercise in the United Kingdom. It also has implications for data mining in OCLC's WorldCat. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

read more

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Assessing the citation impact of books: The role of Google Books, Google Scholar, and Scopus

TL;DR: Comparing the citation counts to 1,000 books submitted to the 2008 U.K. Research Assessment Exercise from Google Books and Google Scholar with Scopus citations shows that in book-oriented disciplines in the social sciences, arts, and humanities, online book citations may be sufficiently numerous to support peer review for research evaluation, at least in the United Kingdom.
Book

Applied Evaluative Informetrics

Henk F. Moed
TL;DR: This chapter presents an introduction to the book, and starts with on overview of the value and limits the use of informetric indicators in research assessment, and presents a short history of the field.
Journal ArticleDOI

The controversial policies of journal ratings: evaluating social sciences and humanities

TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined how three different national organisations (AERES, ERA, ERIH) produce journal ratings as an alternative assessment tool, which is particularly targeted for social sciences and humanities.
Journal ArticleDOI

Can Amazon.com reviews help to assess the wider impacts of books

TL;DR: Metrics based on online reviews are recommended for the evaluation of books that aim at a wide audience inside or outside academia when it is important to capture the broader impacts of educational or cultural activities and when they cannot be manipulated in advance of the evaluation.
Journal ArticleDOI

Taking scholarly books into account: current developments in five European countries

TL;DR: The present paper summarizes the main features of the registration and/or assessment systems developed in five European countries/regions (Spain, Denmark, Flanders, Finland and Norway), focusing on the processes involved in the collection and processing of data on book publications, their weighting, as well as the application in the context of research assessment and funding.
References
More filters
Book

Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation

Henk F. Moed
TL;DR: This work focuses on assessing Basic Science Research Departments and Scientific Journals, as well as Empirical and Theoretical Chapters, and the Citation Indexes, which summarize the literature on empirical and theoretical determinants of scientific research.
Journal ArticleDOI

Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the Social Sciences and the Humanities: A review

TL;DR: This paper addresses research performance monitoring of the social sciences and the humanities using citation analysis using a broader range of both publications and citation indicators and three options for bibliometric monitoring are discussed.
Journal ArticleDOI

Comparing alternatives to the Web of Science for coverage of the social sciences’ literature

TL;DR: Scopus offers the best coverage from amongst these databases and could be used as an alternative to the Web of Science as a tool to evaluate the research impact in the social sciences.
Journal ArticleDOI

Benchmarking scientific output in the social sciences and humanities: The limits of existing databases

TL;DR: There is a 20 to 25% overrepresentation of English-language journals in Thomson Scientific's databases compared to the list of journals presented in Ulrich, which means Thomson Scientific databases cannot be used in isolation to benchmark the output of countries in the SSH.
Journal ArticleDOI

Lifting the crown—citation z-score

TL;DR: An item oriented field normalized citation score average (c¯f) is an incremental improvement as it differs from the crown indicator in so much as normalization takes place on the level of individual publication (or item) rather than on aggregated levels, and therefore assigns equal weight to each publication.
Related Papers (5)