Introducing a novelty indicator for scientific research: validating the knowledge-based combinatorial approach
(2021) In Scientometrics 126. p.6891-6915- Abstract
- Citation counts have long been considered as the primary bibliographic indicator for evaluating the quality of research—a practice premised on the assumption that citation count is reflective of the impact of a scientific publication. However, identifying several limitations in the use of citation counts alone, scholars have advanced the need for multifaceted quality evaluation methods. In this study, we apply a novelty indicator to quantify the degree of citation similarity between a focal paper and a pre-existing same-domain paper from various fields in the natural sciences by proposing a new way of identifying papers that fall into the same domain of focal papers using bibliometric data only. We also conduct a validation analysis, using... (More)
- Citation counts have long been considered as the primary bibliographic indicator for evaluating the quality of research—a practice premised on the assumption that citation count is reflective of the impact of a scientific publication. However, identifying several limitations in the use of citation counts alone, scholars have advanced the need for multifaceted quality evaluation methods. In this study, we apply a novelty indicator to quantify the degree of citation similarity between a focal paper and a pre-existing same-domain paper from various fields in the natural sciences by proposing a new way of identifying papers that fall into the same domain of focal papers using bibliometric data only. We also conduct a validation analysis, using Japanese survey data, to confirm its usefulness. Employing ordered logit and ordinary least squares regression models, this study tests the consistency between the novelty scores of 1871 Japanese papers published in the natural sciences between 2001 and 2006 and researchers’ subjective judgments of their novelty. The results show statistically positive correlations between novelty scores and researchers’ assessment of research types reflecting aspects of novelty in various natural science fields. As such, this study demonstrates that the proposed novelty indicator is a suitable means of identifying the novelty of various types of natural scientific research. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/11db4d20-3943-4380-b593-e9047c922fda
- author
- Matsumoto, Kuniko ; Shibayama, Sotaro LU ; Kang, Byeongwoo and Igami, Masatsura
- organization
- publishing date
- 2021
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- bibliometrics, novelty, reference combination, validation
- in
- Scientometrics
- volume
- 126
- pages
- 6891 - 6915
- publisher
- Akademiai Kiado
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85108657200
- ISSN
- 0138-9130
- DOI
- 10.1007/s11192-021-04049-z
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 11db4d20-3943-4380-b593-e9047c922fda
- alternative location
- https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-021-04049-z
- date added to LUP
- 2021-07-02 23:21:25
- date last changed
- 2024-01-20 09:14:55
@article{11db4d20-3943-4380-b593-e9047c922fda,
abstract = {{Citation counts have long been considered as the primary bibliographic indicator for evaluating the quality of research—a practice premised on the assumption that citation count is reflective of the impact of a scientific publication. However, identifying several limitations in the use of citation counts alone, scholars have advanced the need for multifaceted quality evaluation methods. In this study, we apply a novelty indicator to quantify the degree of citation similarity between a focal paper and a pre-existing same-domain paper from various fields in the natural sciences by proposing a new way of identifying papers that fall into the same domain of focal papers using bibliometric data only. We also conduct a validation analysis, using Japanese survey data, to confirm its usefulness. Employing ordered logit and ordinary least squares regression models, this study tests the consistency between the novelty scores of 1871 Japanese papers published in the natural sciences between 2001 and 2006 and researchers’ subjective judgments of their novelty. The results show statistically positive correlations between novelty scores and researchers’ assessment of research types reflecting aspects of novelty in various natural science fields. As such, this study demonstrates that the proposed novelty indicator is a suitable means of identifying the novelty of various types of natural scientific research.}},
author = {{Matsumoto, Kuniko and Shibayama, Sotaro and Kang, Byeongwoo and Igami, Masatsura}},
issn = {{0138-9130}},
keywords = {{bibliometrics; novelty; reference combination; validation}},
language = {{eng}},
pages = {{6891--6915}},
publisher = {{Akademiai Kiado}},
series = {{Scientometrics}},
title = {{Introducing a novelty indicator for scientific research: validating the knowledge-based combinatorial approach}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04049-z}},
doi = {{10.1007/s11192-021-04049-z}},
volume = {{126}},
year = {{2021}},
}