Bibliometrics in the library

Chances and pitfalls

Wouter Gerritsma, Wageningen UR

Evaluation cycle at universities

Supervised by VSNU/QANU●6 year cycle for external peer reviews●After 3 years midterm review●Unit of analysis (in Wageningen): Graduate schools

Citation analyses are not stipulated in the current Standard Evaluation Protocol. But have become mandatory at Wageningen UR, also at the social sciences department and for the research institutes

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).

Current Research Information Systems

Metis is a current research information system (CRIS)●Information on all labour relations of all faculty and

staff●Information on all projects●Information on all outputs (metadata of

publications)●Data entry at the chair group level ●Quality control by the library (inclusion of DOI)

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●WaY is our OA repository

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●WaY is our OA repository●WaY is our tool for citation analyses

Full screen image with title

Klik op het pictogram als u een afbeelding wilt toevoegen

How do we compare numbers

Scientist Z. Math has a publication from 2001 with 17 citations

Scientist M. Biology has a publication from 2007 with 32 citations

Baselines for Mathematics

Baselines for Molecular Biology

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

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)

We can determine the representativeness of the citation analysis!

Representativeness

Representativeness

How to aggregate from a single publication to an oeuvre?

"CI" like indicator "MNCS" like indicator

Sources of citation data

Web of Science Scopus Google Scholar Microsoft Academic

SciFinder; Psychinfo ArXiv; Citeseer other open access repositories

Other altmetrics initiatives

Web of Science

Citation data (includes also citations from other databases on Wok)

API to download citation data Baselines from ESI "New" product InCites

●Nijmegen has licensed InCites

Scopus Citation data obtainable through an API Benchmarking with SciVal Strata Not yet fully developed

Google Scholar

Give them a few more years Coverage? Ghost citations Content duplication Benchmarking?

Benchmarking in GS?

Wouters, P. & R. Costas (2012). Users, narcissism and control. Utrecht, NL: SURFfoundation. http://www.surffoundation.nl/en/publicaties/Pages/Users_narcissism_control.aspx.

Comment on GS by Jacsó

Jacsó, P. (2011). Google Scholar duped and deduped – the aura of “robometrics”. Online Information Review, 35(1): 154-160 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14684521111113632

Altmetrics

Quickly developing●ScienceCard●Total-Impact●Readermeter●Microsoft

Academic Search●etc.

Wouters, P. & R. Costas (2012). Users, narcissism and control. Utrecht, NL: SURFfoundation. http://www.surffoundation.nl/en/publicaties/Pages/Users_narcissism_control.aspx.

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

Advantage of using Metis / WaY

Improvements in publication lists, etc. recorded Knowledge of, and experience with bibliometric analyses

is better institutionalized Clarity / transparency for researchers Analysis of a single unit of the institute offers advantages

for whole institute Better understanding of our own researchers

●We know where they publish●We know what they cite●We know something about their impact

Library outreach

Improvement of the (meta)data quality in the repository Many presentations for research groups during the

preparation for peer reviews Presentations based on detailed studies of single groups Library gives advice on publication strategies for groups

and individuals●there is a huge demand for these presentations

Developed writing & citing courses with graduate schools

Closing the circle: Collection analysis

With the coupling of publications with WoS We have gained insight in the relation

●Research group – Researchers – Publications – Reference list

●It is feasible to assign journal usage at faculty level, or more detailed (chair groups)

Lessons learned

Start small, gain experience Show you can pull it off How much is your university spending on CWTS? Invest those resources in your own systems

Thank you!

On the Web:@wowterwowter.net www.slideshare.net/wowter