1 of 85

V N South Gujarat University: A Presentation in PhD Course Work���Citation index, Journal Impact Factors , H – Index and Impact Factor

Prof. Satya P. Singh

UGC BSR Faculty

(Formerly Professor & Head)UGC-CAS Department of Biosciences

Saurashtra University, Rajkot, Gujarat, India

Email: satyapsingh@yahoo.com  satyapsingh125@gmail.com  spsingh@sauuni.ac.in

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/satya-singh-2285a5144/

ResearchGate:  https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Satya_Singh5

Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=jiAzOcgAAAAJ

UGC:  https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in//profile/68903/Njg5MDM%3D  

ORCID Id         https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7531-2872

2 of 85

Ethics in Research and Publications

Formats and Objectivity of the Research

  • Survey & Distribution of a trend/information/patterns: in a given section of the society or selected categories of the population, eg. Education/Literacy/Nutritional status/Occurrence of a disease/behavioral patterns

Or In a living system-

  • Exploratory & Observational: Do something-Get something

  • Asking question/ answering a question/Proving a Hypothesis:

  • Validation & Confirmation of the facts/observations: Bioinformatics based predictions, any other observation, Hypothetical/Speculative conclusions

  • Inventions/ Theory/Principles: some times accidental/unplanned/un-designed
  • સંશોધન અને પ્રકાશનમાં નૈતિકતા
  • સંશોધનનાં બંધારણો અને વસ્તુગતતા
  • વલણ / માહિતી / પેટર્નનું સર્વેક્ષણ અને વિતરણ: સમાજના આપેલ વિભાગમાં અથવા વસ્તીના પસંદ કરેલા વર્ગોમાં, દા.ત. શિક્ષણ/સાક્ષરતા/પોષકતત્વોની સ્થિતિ/રોગ/વર્તણૂકની પેટર્નની ઘટના અથવા તો જીવંત તંત્રમાં-
  • સંશોધનાત્મક અને નિરીક્ષણાત્મકઃ કશુંક કરો- કશુંક મેળવો
  • પ્રશ્ન પૂછવો/પ્રશ્નનો જવાબ આપવો/પૂર્વધારણા સાબિત કરવીઃ
  • હકીકતો/અવલોકનોની માન્યતા અને પુષ્ટિઃ બાયોઇન્ફોર્મેટિક્સ આધારિત આગાહીઓ, અન્ય કોઈ અવલોકન, કાલ્પનિક/સટ્ટાકીય તારણો
  • શોધ/ થિયરી/સિદ્ધાંતો: કેટલીક વખત આકસ્મિક/બિનઆયોજિત/બિન-ડિઝાઇન કરેલ

3 of 85

Ethics in Research and Publications

  • Conceiving the Idea- Original/ Existing knowledge in different form/Offshoots of the existing knowledge

  • Designing the Experimental Protocols/ Research Methodologies: Natural Sciences/Social Sciences/ Languages/etc

  • Observations and Data Analysis

  • Conclusions and Inferences

  • Citations and Acknowledgement

4 of 85

Ethics in Research and Publications

  • Retrieving the information

  • Using the information generated and published by others

  • Plagiarism: Data
    • ■ Words and Phrases
    • ■ Ideas and Concepts

  • Permission form the Authors & Publishers

  • Acknowledgement

5 of 85

Ethics.elsevier.com

Ethics-in-research-and-publication-brochure.pdf

6 of 85

RESEARCH, PUBLICATIONS AND QUALITY ASSESSMENT

  • WIDE VARIATION IN THE ASSESSMENT AND QUALITY JUDGMENT

  • DIFFERENTIAL LEVEL OF RESEARCH OUTPUT- Reflected by number/frequency/quality of the publication

  • LACK OF INTEREST

  • DIFFERENCES IN OVER ALL OBJECTIVES

  • TYPES OF PUBLICATIONS: Books, Book Chapters, Review articles, Research Papers, Comments, Criticisms

  • TYPES AND QUALITY OF THE JOURNALS: Text books, Reference Books, edited books, Journals, Review journals

7 of 85

Citation index

  • A citation index is an index of citations between publications allowing the user to easily establish which later documents cite which earlier documents.
  • First as legal citation- Shephard citation-1873
  • In 1960, Eugene Grafield’s institute for Institute of Scientific Information (ISI) introduced the first citation index for papers for academic journals.
  • Starting with Science Citation Index (SCI) and later expanding to produce the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI).
  • The first citation was done by CiteSeer in 1997.Other sources for such data include Google Scholar.
  • Science ► Social Sciences ► Humanities
  • Retrieval Informations Research Evaluation ► Basis for IF

8 of 85

Major citation indexing services

  • ISI (now part of Thomson Scientific), which publishes the ISI citation indexes in print and compact disc.
  • Elsevier, which publishes Scopus .
  • They differ widely in cost: the ISI databases and Scopus are Subscription databases, the others are freely available online.

9 of 85

Citation analysis

  • Citation indexes were originally designed for information retrieval purposes, increasingly used for bibliometric and other studies involving research evaluation.
  • Citation is the basis of the popular journal impact factor.
  • Large body of literature on citation analysis sometimes called as scientometrics or more specifically bibliometrics.
  • Free citation tools are CiteBase, CiteSeerX, Google Scholar and Windows Live Academic.

10 of 85

Cont.

  • The use of citation counts to rank journals was a technique used in the early part of the nineteenth century.
  • Irving Sher showed the correlation between citation frequency and eminence in demonstrating that

Noble prize winners

Published 5 times the average numbers of papers

Citation 30-50 times

11 of 85

Journal Impact Factor

  • The impact factor, is a measure reflecting the average number of citations to articles published in science and social science journals.
  • Journals with higher impact factors ► More Important than those with lower ones.
  • The impact factor was devised by Eugene Garfield, the founder of the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI), now part of Thomson Reuters.

12 of 85

Thomson Reuters Corporation

A Canada-based multinationalCanada-based multinational media conglomerate

The company was founded in Toronto, Ontario, Canada,

Thomson Reuters was created by the Thomson Corporation’s

purchase of the British company Reuters Group in April 2008 and is

majority owned by The Woodbridge Company, a holding company for the Thomson family.[9]

13 of 85

  • Calculation of Impact Factor:
  • In a given year, the impact factor of a journal is the average number of citations received per paper published in that journal during the two preceding years.

  • For example, if a journal has an impact factor of 3 in 2008, then its papers published in 2006 and 2007 received 3 citations each on average. The 2008 impact factor of a journal would be calculated as follows:

  • A = the number of times articles published in 2006 and 2007 were cited by indexed journals during 2008

B = the total number of "citable items" published by that journal in 2006 and 2007.

2008 impact factor = A/B

14 of 85

Use & Validity of Impact factor

  • To compare different journals: within a certain field
  • Highly discipline-dependent:
  • Could not be reproduced in an independent audit
  • It refers to the average number of citations per paper
  • Not a normal distribution
  • Self-citation: The frequency of author’s own work
  • Journals Self-citation is common- High overlaps in readerships and authors

15 of 85

Editorial policies which alter the impact factor

  • Larger percentage of review articles by the journals: Generally cited more than research reports
  • Review Journals: Highest impact factors in their respective fields.
  • Methods in the same Journals: Would enhance IF in their respective fields.
  • “Citable items”: Journals may change the fraction
  • The impact factor of the journal Acta Crystallographica Section A rose from 2.051 in 2008 to 49.926 in 2009, more than Nature (31.434) and Science (28.103). – Crystal structure determination
  • Word- Phrase-software being frequently used

16 of 85

Incorrect application of IF

  • To evaluate the significance of an individual publication or to evaluate an individual researcher, may be incorrectly applied
  • A small number of publications are cited much more than the majority - for example, about 90% of Nature's 2004 impact factor was based on only 25% of its publications,
  • Underestimation of the MOST-CITED Articles and Exaggeration of the citations of the majority of the articles
  • Assess the quality of the content of individual articles, not the reputation of the journal.
  • Individual Articles vs Journals Reputation

17 of 85

Impact Factor Distortions

  • Science 17 May 2013: �Vol. 340 no. 6134 p. 787 �DOI: 10.1126/science.1240319
  • EDITORIAL
  • Bruce Alberts
  • Bruce Alberts is Editor-in-Chief of Science.

  • San Francisco declaration on research Assessment (DORA)

  • "journal impact factor" in judging an individual scientist's work. The Declaration states that the impact factor must not be used as "a surrogate measure of the quality of individual research articles,

To assess an individual scientist's contributions, or in hiring, promotion, or funding decisions."

18 of 85

The misuse of the journal impact factor:

Bias journals against publishing important papers in fields (such as social sciences and ecology) that are much less cited than others (such as biomedicine).

It takes years to create a new approach in a new experimental context, during which no publications should be expected.

Such metrics further block innovation because they encourage scientists to work in areas of science that are already highly populated, as it is only in these fields that large numbers of scientists can be expected to reference one's work, no matter how outstanding

19 of 85

     Nature NEWS  06 FEBRUARY 2020

Highly cited researcher banned from journal board for citation abuse

Biophysicist Kuo-Chen Chou: repeatedly suggested dozens of citations be added to papers.

Richard Van Noorden

A US-based biophysicist who is one of the world’s most highly cited researchers has been removed from the editorial board of one journal and barred as a reviewer for another, after repeatedly manipulating the peer-review process to a mass citations to his own work.

On 29 January, three editors at the Journal of Theoretical Biology (JTBannounced in an editorial that the journal had investigated and barred an unnamed editor from the board for “scientific misconduct of the highest order”.

20 of 85

Quantifying Long-Term Scientific Impact

Dashun Wang1,2,*Chaoming Song1,3,*Albert-László Barabási1,4,5,6,

Science 4 October 2013: Vol. 342 no. 6154 pp. 127-132 

The lack of predictability of citation-based measures frequently used to gauge impact, from impact factors to short-term citations:

Is there long-term predictability in citation patterns?

A mechanistic model for the citation dynamics of individual papers that allows us to collapse the citation histories of papers from different journals and disciplines into a single curve,

Indicating that all papers tend to follow the same universal temporal pattern.

The observed patterns not only help us uncover basic mechanisms that govern scientific impact but also offer reliable measures of influence that may have potential policy implications.

21 of 85

Quantifying Long-Term Scientific Impact

Dashun Wang1,2,*Chaoming Song1,3,*Albert-László Barabási1,4,5,6,

Science 4 October 2013: Vol. 342 no. 6154 pp. 127-132 

The lack of predictability of citation-based measures frequently used to gauge impact, from impact factors to short-term citations:

Is there long-term predictability in citation patterns?

A mechanistic model for the citation dynamics of individual papers that allows us to collapse the citation histories of papers from different journals and disciplines into a single curve,

Indicating that all papers tend to follow the same universal temporal pattern.

The observed patterns not only help us uncover basic mechanisms that govern scientific impact but also offer reliable measures of influence that may have potential policy implications.

22 of 85

Quantifying Long-Term Scientific Impact

Dashun Wang1,2,*Chaoming Song1,3,*Albert-László Barabási1,4,5,6,

Science 4 October 2013: Vol. 342 no. 6154 pp. 127-132 

The lack of predictability of citation-based measures frequently used to gauge impact, from impact factors to short-term citations:

Is there long-term predictability in citation patterns?

A mechanistic model for the citation dynamics of individual papers that allows us to collapse the citation histories of papers from different journals and disciplines into a single curve,

Indicating that all papers tend to follow the same universal temporal pattern.

The observed patterns not only help us uncover basic mechanisms that govern scientific impact but also offer reliable measures of influence that may have potential policy implications.

23 of 85

24 of 85

Science 25 October 2013: �Vol. 342 no. 6157 pp. 468-472 �DOI: 10.1126/science.1240474

  • REPORT

Atypical Combinations and Scientific Impact

+Author Affiliations

  • 1Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, 2001 Sheridan Road, Evanston, IL 60208, USA.
  • 2Northwestern Institute on Complex Systems, Northwestern University, 600 Foster, Evanston, IL 60208, USA.
  • 3Datascope Analytics, 180 West Adams Street, Chicago, IL 60603, USA.
  • 4National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA.
  • *Corresponding author. E-mail: bjones@kellogg.northwestern.edu
  • ABSTRACT
  • EDITOR'S SUMMARY

Novelty is an essential feature of creative ideas, yet the building blocks of new ideas are often embodied in existing

knowledge. From this perspective, balancing atypical knowledge with conventional knowledge may be critical to the

link between innovativeness and impact.

Our analysis of 17.9 million papers spanning all scientific fields suggests that science follows a nearly universal pattern:

The highest-impact science is primarily

grounded in exceptionally conventional combinations of prior work yet simultaneously features an intrusion

of unusual combinations. Papers of this

type were twice as likely to be highly cited works. Novel combinations of prior work are rare, yet teams are 37.7%

more likely than solo authors

to insert novel combinations into familiar knowledge domains.

  • Received for publication 14 May 2013.
  • Accepted for publication 20 September 2013.

Read the Full Text

25 of 85

No more first authors, no more last authors

WORLD VIEW

25 September 2018, Nature 561, 435 (2018) doi: 10.1038/d41586-018-06779-2

Gretchen L. Kiser

If we really want transdisciplinary research, we must ditch the ordered listing of authors that stalls collaborative science, says Gretchen L. Kiser.

Every academic scientist has heard a tale of someone being shafted on an authorship list, or had it happen to them. Less appreciated is how much the attribution of credit impedes cross-disciplinary approaches to difficult questions. It creates a negative feedback loop that hinders research. Most scientists agree that research questions and approaches have become more complex, so the need to engage in expanded team science has increased. I’ve found, however, that there is great reluctance among faculty members to join such efforts. I find myself asking, ‘What if we completely blow up the way in which we attribute authorship?’ I suspect that if we got rid of first authors, last authors and the fight for asterisks, we might interrupt the negative feedback loop and see more innovation.

Since 2012, I’ve led the Research Development Office at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF). One of our goals is to bring together researchers of varying backgrounds to encourage innovative thinking and new approaches. My team identifies and cajoles ‘champions’ to invite colleagues to participate in team-building events. We offer financial and logistical support; we bring in interesting speakers; we provide drinks and food (and not just pizza!) — all to get scientists to talk to each other about their research, needs and ambitions. But the resource that really matters is not mine to dispense: credit for scientific contributions.

There are real successes: one of our ‘speed-networking’ events at UCSF introduced neurologist Dena Dubal, who investigates the molecular mechanisms of longevity and neurodegenerative disease, to psychologist Aric Prather, who researches the effects of stress on health. That led to a project that revealed an association between chronic psychological stress and lower levels of a longevity hormone. They published that work and continue to collaborate (A. A. Prather et al. Transl. Psychiatr. 5, e585; 2015).

Other teams we’ve helped have received follow-on support from external funders such as the US National Institutes of Health. Surveys tell me that faculty members enjoy our team-building events, even when they did not expect to, and that they would recommend them to others. Nevertheless, there seems to be an undeclared disincentive for researchers to build unconventional collaborations. I get frustrated with the disconnect between what we say about the need for transdisciplinary teams to solve complex problems and the reluctance to try something new to build those teams. The assessment of publications during promotion and tenure decisions is a big part of the problem. Although these processes often have some mechanism to recognize a researcher’s team contributions, the culture remains largely unchanged from 50 years ago. The gravitas associated with ‘first’ and ‘senior’ authorship is entrenched. What about the middle author who might have significantly altered the approach? Or the fourth-place author who linked different disciplines? Often these researchers are left to find only self-satisfaction. Many journals now allow, and even require, statementsOther teams we’ve helped have received follow-on support from external funders such as the US National Institutes of Health. Surveys tell me that faculty members enjoy our team-building events, even when they did not expect to, and that they would recommend them to others. Nevertheless, there seems to be an undeclared disincentive for researchers to build unconventional collaborations. I get frustrated with the disconnect between what we say about the need for transdisciplinary teams to solve complex problems and the reluctance to try something new to build those teams. The assessment of publications during promotion and tenure decisions is a big part of the problem. Although these processes often have some mechanism to recognize a researcher’s team contributions, the culture remains largely unchanged from 50 years ago. The gravitas associated with ‘first’ and ‘senior’ authorship is entrenched. What about the middle author who might have significantly altered the approach? Or the fourth-place author who linked different disciplines? Often these researchers are left to find only self-satisfaction. Many journals now allow, and even require, statements that explain contributors’ roles in their publications. Taxonomies and standardized vocabularies for describing authors’ roles have been developed. Similarly, promotion and tenure committees are using contribution narratives in their assessments. These changes are helping. They capture a fuller spectrum of a researcher’s productivity so that evaluators can consider more than where someone sits in an author list. Still, I’ve had senior faculty members tell me that, even though they look at the contribution narratives, they still expect to see first-author and then senior-author papers when assessing candidates.

Meanwhile, research projects are starting to incorporate data that no one on the immediate team collected, and there are no settled conventions for crediting outside researchers or incentivizing that valuable work.

We need a cultural shift to recognize and reward scientists who make their work useful to others, including researchers who might never meet but whose data are used. One way to make this happen is to get rid of ordered author lists. By developing author contribution taxonomies and narratives, we have already acknowledged the need to reflect the multifaceted nature of authorship. Large consortia and organizations are adopting contribution frameworks to reflect author roles and participation more accurately. We are also moving to use repository tools that assign authorship to different types of research output, such as data sets. More effort, creativity and diversity of thought are needed. We should stop trying to apply old attribution models to the innovative ways we now generate data.

If we can reveal the shape of proteins at atomic resolutions, tweak genes to order and detect cosmic signals from the beginning of time, then surely we can work out better ways to represent author contributions. We already send complex basic research and clinical data into ‘information commons’ and build computational ‘knowledge network’ tools to inform patient diagnostics and therapeutics. A well-annotated data set might be combined with other data to expand its impact synergistically. Can we imagine an author attribution method that would use cutting-edge computational tools similar to those being applied to scientific research itself? A tool that gives credit where credit is due?

If we acknowledge the products of research in more-innovative ways, the value of ‘team-ness’ might grow in academic culture and the cutting edge will get sharper. Perhaps, then, I won’t have to cajole anyone to participate in team-building activities.

26 of 85

27 of 85

Responses and Other measures of impact

  • According to European Association of Science Editors (EASE)the journal impact factors are used only - and cautiously –

For measuring and comparing the influence of the entire journals,

Not for the assessment of single papers, and certainly not for the assessment of researchers or research programmes

  • Cited half-life: the median age of the articles that were cited in Journal Citation Reports each year.
  • Aggregate impact factor for a subject category: it is calculated taking into account the number of citations to all journals in the subject category and the number of articles from all the journals in the subject category.

28 of 85

H - Index

  • Productivity and impact of the published work of a scientist or a scholar
  • Applied to the productivity and impact of a group of scientists, such as a department or university or country.
  • The index was suggested by Jorge E. Hirsch, and is sometimes called the Hirsch index or Hirsch number.

29 of 85

H-Index plot

30 of 85

  • Comparing scientists working in the same field: citation conventions differ widely among different fields
  • Highly cited articles contribute to the h-index: its determination is a relatively simpler process
  • The h-index grows as citations accumulate and thus it depends on the 'academic age' of a researcher.
  • Hirsch suggested that, for physicists, a value for h of about:

10–12 for tenure decisions at major research universities. A val

18 -a full professorship

15–20- a fellowship in the American Physical Society, and

45- Membership in the United States National Academy of Sciences.

31 of 85

Calculating h

  • The h-index can be manually determined using citation databases or using automatic tools
  • Subscription-based databases such as Scopus and the Web of Knowledge provide automated calculators.
  • H index means h, it means that h of his Np papers have at least h citations each
  • In addition, specific databases, such as the Stanford Physics Information Retrieval System (SPIRES) can automatically calculate h-index for researchers working in High Energy Physics.

32 of 85

Advantages

  • Bibliometric indicators: The h-index was intended to address the main disadvantages of other, such as total number of papers or total number of citations.
  • Quality and sustainability of the scientific output: simultaneously
  • Much less affected by the methodological papers- proposing successful new techniques, methods or approximations, which can be extremely highly cited.

33 of 85

Criticism

  • Number of authors: The h-index does not account
  • Does not account for the typical number of citations in different fields: Different fields, or journals, traditionally use different numbers of citations
  • Bounded by the total number of publications: citations made in a negative context and citations made to fraudulent or retracted work
  • Researcher in the same stage of their careers: The index intended as a tool to evaluate researchers in the same stage of their careers

34 of 85

Impact Factor: Indian Contest

  • Impact factor is an index based on the frequency with which a journal’s articles are cited in scientific publications, a marker of journal quality
  • It provides quantitative tools for ranking, evaluating, categorizing and comparing journals
  • A tool for the management of library journal collections
  • In research, the impact factor provides quantitative evidence for editors and publishers

35 of 85

Limitations

  • Review articles generally are cited more frequently than typical research articles.
  • Method articles: It is widely believed that methods articles attract more citations than other types of articles
  • Journal self-citation.
  • It does not distinguish between letters, reviews, or original research.
  • The coverage is very uneven.

36 of 85

References

37 of 85

Citation Analysis

38 of 85

Citation Calculation

The meaning of citations is not simple and citation‐based statistics are not nearly as "objective" as proponents assert.

Research usually has multiple goals and it is therefore reasonable that its value must be judged by multiple criteria.

39 of 85

Cited Reference Searching

Traditional search

1982 paper

1957 paper

1996 paper

1982 paper

1996 paper

1957 paper

1987 paper

2004 paper

2001 paper

1993 paper

Cited reference search

40 of 85

Why use this type of search?

    • Forward and backward in time: Allows you to move Forward and backward in time, discovering relationships between published works as determined by the articles authors
      • Find new, unknown information based on older, known information
      • Find variant citations
      • Search cites to non-journal literature
      • Backward through “Cited References”
    • Uses cited references as subject terms
    • Explore hidden connections between research papers.Give the strength to the researcher

41 of 85

Citation Reports

  • Create reports
  • Available for:
    • Search
    • Search within Results
    • Author Finder
    • Refine/Analyze

  • Not available for:
    • Cited Reference Search
    • Citing Articles Summary
    • Related Records Search Results

42 of 85

Use�

  • Common use of citation analysis is to determine the impact of a single author on a given field by counting the number of times the author has been cited by others

  • To explore the impact of their field

  • To examine the effects of a set of researchers

  • To study the impact of a particular paper

  • To help the government to find top experts in the field in order to set up a group of scholars

43 of 85

44 of 85

Web of Science

  • Consists of 5 databases
    • Science Citation Index Expanded
      • 6,650 journals since 1900
    • Social Sciences Citation Index
      • 1,950 (+3,300) journals since 1956
    • Arts & Humanities Citation Index
      • 1,160 journals (+6,800)
    • Index Chemicus (chemical structures)
    • Current Chemical Reactions (synthetic methods)

45 of 85

Web of Science: citation analysis

  • 100,000s NEW cited references added each week
  • Generate citation reports
  • Eliminate self-citations
  • My Citation Alerts’
  • Author-finder (The Distinct Author Set feature)
    • “A discovery tool showing sets of papers likely written by the same person. Citation data is analyzed to create these sets. This feature should be used as a tool to focus your search rather than as a definitive list of a specific author's works.”

46 of 85

Web of Science: methodology

  • Search for relevant articles on the topic
  • Limit articles by location and institution
  • Rank articles by times cited
  • List authors of most often cited articles
  • Create citation reports on individual authors
  • Rank authors according to citations
  • Choose appropriate scholars from list

47 of 85

48 of 85

49 of 85

50 of 85

51 of 85

52 of 85

53 of 85

Web of Science: Evaluation

Pros

  • Citation report provides clear data and graphs over time
  • Author finder helps differentiate different authors with same name
  • ‘My Citation Alerts’ allows personalization
  • Results page allows for refining

Cons

  • Still difficult to differentiate authors with same name
  • Cannot produce author-based citation reports from a list of articles
  • Can limit by country but cannot exclude countries
  • Difficult to locate controlled vocabulary used in subject indexing

54 of 85

Multidisciplinary Database

Coverage of:

  • Social sciences
  • Life sciences
  • Health sciences
  • Physical sciences

Scopus includes research literature published in:

  • 15, 000 peer reviewed academic journals
  • 1,200 Open Access journals
  • 500 conference proceedings
  • Over 600 trade publications
  • book chapters and 200 book series
  • 386 million web sources (author homepages, university sites, Open Archives Initiative)
  • 22 million patents

�Includes citation analysis for journals and authors from 1996 and on.

55 of 85

What is the Scopus Citation Tracker?�

  • It enables users to track data year by year for a specific author or topic.

With the Scopus Citation Tracker, users can:

  • Identify most highly cited author in a field
  • Find real-time citation data of articles and authors of interest
  • Find out what topics are hot in various subject areas
  • Find out what subjects are being cited by other subjects
  • See what are the top cited works in 26 pre-selected fields

Also generates the h-graph:

  • The h-index was developed by J.E. Hirsch.

Hirsch defines the h index as follows:

“The h-index is based on the highest number of papers included that have had at least the same number of citations. “

  • For Example: An h-graph for a group of selected documents or selected author(s) with an h index of 12 means that out of the total number of documents selected to produce the graph, 12 of the documents have been cited at least 12 times.

Citation Tracker Tool

56 of 85

Once you have refined your results, you can select one, some or all of the hits and run a citation analysis using the “citation tracker” option.

Citation Analysis Step 1

57 of 85

The Citation Overview page allow exclusion of “self-citations”, date range manipulation and 4 different ways to sort the results.

Citation Analysis Step 2

58 of 85

Citation Analysis - Results

59 of 85

At this point, the searcher must make a decision: to track the authors whose works appear most often in the results or the authors whose works are ones most often cited?

Vs.

Author Tracking – Decision Point

60 of 85

Author Search

61 of 85

Author Selection

62 of 85

Author’s Citation Analysis

Analysis for P.A. Matson

63 of 85

Personal observations:

Cons:

  • Citation analysis from 1996 on- so landmark articles from earlier years may not show up.
  • Does not allow automatic generation of top-cited authors’ list from search results
  • Poor ability to limit to a country (academics move around and publish in countries other than their country of residence)
  • The citation analysis page does not have the author’s name displayed

Pros:

  • Generates a list of keywords relevant to the term searched (enriches searcher’s vocabulary and assists in refining search query
  • Allows very precise control and manipulation of results through “refine results” options
  • Allows personalization, list-saving and automatic alerts
  • Good multidisciplinary coverage of topics in one search (e.g.- see who is writing about sustainable agriculture in a variety of fields)
  • Has function to eliminate self citations by the authors being analyzed
  • Precise author indexing (few instances of numerous variations in authors’ names)

Multidisciplinary Database

64 of 85

Google Scholar

  • Articles from some of CrossRef’s partipating publishers and others that have made content available to Google Scholar�
  • More medicine and scientific resources than humanities and social science
  • Preprints, e-prints, university publications�
  • Books from OCLC’s Open WorldCat�the most accessible content, i.e., open access (OA) and public domain collections. ... WorldCat Local helps us prioritize which copyright holders to approach.

  • Citations extracted from crawled articles using “special algorithms”

65 of 85

How scholarly is Google Scholar?

  • Google says it has “peer-reviewed papers, theses, books, abstracts and articles…” �
  • Unscholarly items find their way into GS�
  • Ranking of items gives weight to number of times cited, and the number of versions (preprints, conference papers, mirror sites)�
  • Never assume…

66 of 85

Citations in Google Scholar:�

 

Go to Google Scholar – http://scholar.google.com/

 

Do a search for a particular name and topic and then add to the end of the search “-author:”

Example searches:

author: S.P.Singh

Google Scholar Articles Add id and password in Gmail account Add name of author Get Result

67 of 85

68 of 85

69 of 85

Web of Science

Scopus

Google Scholar

    • Science Citation Index Expanded
    • Social Sciences Citation Index
    • Arts & Humanities Citation Index
    • Index Chemicus (chemical structures)
    • Current Chemical Reactions (synthetic method)
  • Social sciences
  • Life sciences
  • Health sciences
  • Physical sciences

Articles from some of CrossRef’s partipating publishers and others that have made content available to Google Scholar

More medicine and scientific resources than humanities and social science

Preprints, e-prints, university publications

Books from OCLC’s Open WorldCat

6,650 journals since 1900

1,950 (+3,300) journals since 1956

1,160 journals (+6,800)

15, 000 peer reviewed academic journals

1,200 Open Access journals

500 conference proceedings

Over 600 trade publications

book chapters and 200 book series

386 million web sources (author homepages, university sites, Open Archives Initiative)

22 million patents

Includes citation analysis for journals and authors from 1996 and on

Citations extracted from crawled articles using “special algorithms”

GS also includes non scholarly material as well as books

Google Scholar has a wider coverage of Open Access (OA) web documents and non-journal documents more useful for citation tracking across full text documents

70 of 85

Research Team

Dr. Sangeeta Gohel, Assistant Professor

Dr. Vikram Raval, DST Young Scientist (Now at Gujarat University)

Dr. Aparna Singh, DST Women Scientist ( Now Asstt. Prof, Surat)

Dr. Kalpana Rakholiya, SERB- National Post-Doctoral Fellow

Ms. Kruti Dangar, DST Women Scientist (Now Asstt. prof, Saurashtra University)

&

Ph.D./M.Phil/M.Sc. Students

71 of 85

  • Dr. Bharat Joshi (Canada)
  • Dr. Manish Bhatt ( Canada)
  • Dr. Rajesh K. Patel ( Professor, VNUSG, Surat)
  • Dr. Anju Mittal ( Scientist, USA)
  • Dr. Mital Dodia ( Scientist, Canada)
  • Dr.. Jignasha Thumar ( Asstt. Prof. Gandhinagar)
  • Dr. Rupal Joshi (ZRC, Ahmedabad)
  • Dr. Chetna Rajyaguru (Associate Prof. Rajkot)
  • Ms. Geera Mankad ( Associate Prof. Rajkot)
  • Dr. Chirantan Raval ( Asst Prof., Govt College)
  • Dr. Megha Purohit ( Scientist and Entrepreneur, Canada)
  • Dr. Himanshu Bhimani ( Associate Prof. Navsari Ag Univ,)
  • Dr. Bhavtosh Kikani (Asstt Prof. CHARUSAT)

  • Dr. Vikram Raval (Asstt Prof. Gujarat University)
  • Dr. Sangeeta Gohel (Asstt Prof. Saurashtra University)
  • Dr. Sandeep Pandey (Scientist, Pharma, Daman)
  • Dr. Viral Akbari ( Scientist, UK)
  • Dr. Rushit Shukla (Asstt Prof. Christ College, Rajkot)
  • Dr. Amit Sharma (Scientist, ZRC, Ahmedabad)
  • Dr. Kruti Dangar (Asstt Prof. Saurashtra University)
  • Dr. Atman Vaidya ( Biology Teacher & Entrepreneur)
  • Dr.r. Hitarth Bhatt (Asstt Prof. Virani College, Rajkot)
  • Dr. Rupal Pandya (USA)
  • Dr. Foram Thakrar ( Ahmedabad)
  • Dr. Dalip Singh Rathore ( GBRC, Gandhinagar)

Acknowledgements : Ph.D. Students

72 of 85

Financial Support

DBT, UGC, DST, MoES, GSBTM,

Saurashtra University, Rajkot

Research Collaborations

  • IIT Delhi, New Delhi: Prof. S. K.Khare
  • DUSC, New Delhi: Prof. Sanjay Kapoor
  • NFRI, Tsukuba, Japan: Dr. Kiyoshi Hayashi ( Now at Toyo University, Japan)
  • Griffith University, Australia
  • JNTU Hyderabad, Prof. Ch. Sasikala
  • Central University of Hyderabad, Prof. Ch. Rama Rao

73 of 85

74 of 85

Recent Publications

( Cumulative Impact factor : 201, H-Index: 31)

2021

Dwivedi, Purna, Sharma, A. K. and Singh, S.P. 2021. Biochemical properties and repression studies of an alkaline serine protease from a haloalkaliphilic actinomycete, Nocarpdiopsis dassonvillei subsp. albirubida OK-14. Biocatalysis and Agricultural Biotechnology, Accepted. 07 June 2021 (Elsevier; IF: 0.90)

Kikani, B.A. and Singh, S.P. 2021. Amylases from thermophilic bacteria: Structure and Function Relationship. Critical Reviews in Biotechnology, In Press, 30 April 2021 (Taylor & Francis; IF: 8.102)

Rathore, D. R., Sheikh, M., Gohel G.D, and Singh, S.P. 2021. Genetic and phenotypic heterogeneity of the Nocardiopsis alba strains of sea water. Current Microbiology, 78: 1377-1387 (Springer; IF: 1.75), DOI: 10.1007/s00284-021-02420-0

  •  

75 of 85

2021

  •  

Chauhan, J.V., Mathukiya, R. Singh, S.P. and Gohel, S.D. 2021. Two steps purification, biochemical characterization, thermodynamics and structure elucidation of thermostable alkaline serine protease from Nocardiopsis alba strain OM-5. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules (IJBIOMAC), 169: 39-50 (Elsevier; IF: 5.16), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.12.061 , Available On-Line 12 Dec 2020.

Rathore, D R and Singh, S.P. 2021. Kinetics of growth and co-production of amylase and protease in novel marine actinomycete, Streptomyces lopnurensis KaM5. Folia Microbiologica (Springer; IF: 1.70), https://doi.org/10.1007/s12223-020-00843-z

76 of 85

2020

Sharma, A.K. Kikani, B.A. and Singh S.P. 2020, Diversity and Phylogeny of Actinomycetes of Arabian Sea along the Gujarat Coast. Geomicrobiology Journal (Taylor & Francis, IF 1.90), DOI: 10.1080/01490451.2020.1860165

Raiyani, Nirali and Singh S.P. 2020, Extraction of environmental DNA, construction of metagenomic libraries and functional screening of enzymes from salt pan soil, Indian Journal of Geo-Marine Sciences, Accepted (NISCARE, CSIR, IF 0.50),

Raiyani, Nirali and Singh S.P. 2020, Taxonomic and functional profiling of the microbial communities of Arabian Sea: A Metagenomics approach �Journal: Genomics (Elsevier, IF 6.20), 112:4361- 4369 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygeno.2020.07.024

Bhatt, H.B. and Singh S.P. 2020, Cloning, Expression and structural elucidation of a biotechnologically potential alkaline serine protease from a newly isolated Haloalkaliphilic Bacillus lehensis JO-26, Frontiers in Microbiology (IF 4.25), 11:1-16, https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2020.00941

 

 

77 of 85

2020

Sharma, A.K. Kikani, B.A. and Singh S.P. 2020, Biochemical, thermodynamic and structural characteristics of a biotechnologically compatible alkaline protease from a haloalkaliphilic, Nocardiopsis dassonvillei OK-18 International Journal of Biological Macromolecules (IJBIOMAC), 153:680-696, DOI: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.03.006 (IF 5.16)

Pandya, Rupal D. and Singh S.P. 2020, Pigment production by an extreme halophilic archaeon on Halorubrum sp. J4.2.2 from little Rann of Kutch, Gujarat, India. Research Journal of Biotechnology, 15(1):88-100. E-ISSN: 2278-4535 Print ISSN: 0973-6263

 

78 of 85

2019

 

Thakrar, F.J. and Singh S.P. 2019. Catalytic, thermodynamic and structural properties of an immobilized and highly thermostable alkaline protease from a haloalkaliphilic actinobacteria, Nocardiopsis alba Tata-5. Bioresource Technology, 278:150-158 (IF 5.802)

Sheikh, M., Rathore, D.S., Gohel, S.D. and Singh S.P. 2019. Cultivation and characteristics of the Marine Actinobacterial from the Sea water of Alang, Bhavnagar. Indian Journal of Geo-Marine Sciences (CSIR-NISCARE), 48(12), 1896-1901(IF 0.4).

Rathore, D.S., Sheikh, M.A., Gohel, S.D. and Singh, S.P. (2019) Isolation strategies, abundance and characteristics of the marine actinomycetes of Kachhighadi, Gujarat, India. Journal of Marine Biological Association of India (JMBAI), CMFRI Cochin, India 61(1): 21-27

 

79 of 85

2018

 

Gohel, S. D. and Singh S.P. 2018. Thermodynamics of a Ca2+ dependent, highly thermostable and detergent compatible purified alkaline serine protease from Nocardiopsis xinjiangensis strain OM-6. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules (IJBIOMAC), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.02.157, 113:565-574 (IF 3.00)

 

Gohel, S. D. and Singh S.P. 2018. Molecular phylogeny and diversity of the salt-tolerant alkaliphilic actinobacteria inhabiting Coastal Gujarat, India. Geomicrobiology Journal, DOI: 10.1080/01490451.2018.1471107, 35:9, 775-789 (IF 1.5)

Thakrar, F.J., Kikani, B.A., Sharma, A.K. and Singh S.P. 2018. Stability of alkaline proteases from haloalkaliphilic actinobacteria probed by circular dichroism spectroscopy. Applied Biochemistry and Microbiology (Russia), 54(6), 591-602 (IF 0.68)

 

Sheikh, M., Rathore, D. S., Gohel, S. D. and Singh S.P. 2018. Marine actinobacteria associated with the invertebrate hosts: a rich source of bioactive compounds: A Review. (Invited contribution) Journal of Cell &Tissue Research, 18 (01), 6361-6374.

80 of 85

2018

 

Dangar, K. G., Kalasava, A. B., Dave, A. V. and Singh S.P. 2018. Molecular diversity of Nocardiopsis alba sp. isolated from the coastal region of Gujarat, India. Journal of Cell &Tissue Research, 18(3) 6559-6570

Vaidya A., Nair, V. S., Georrge, J. and Singh S.P. 2018. Comparative analysis of thermophilic proteases, Research Journal of Life Sciences, Bioinformatics, Pharaceutical and Chemical Sciences (RJLBPCS) 4(6), P. 66. DOI: 10.26479/2018.0406.05

 

Pandey, S. Sharma, A.K., Solanki, Kiran P. and Singh S.P. January 2018. Catalysis and stability of an extracellular α- amylase from a haloalkaliphilic bacterium as a function of the organic solvents at different pH, salt concentrations and temperatures. Indian Journal of Geo-Marine Sciences (CSIR-NISCARE), 47 (01), 240-248 (IF 0.4).

 

 

 

81 of 85

2018

 

Dangar, K. G., Kalasava, A. B., Dave, A. V. and Singh S.P. 2018. Molecular diversity of Nocardiopsis alba sp. isolated from the coastal region of Gujarat, India. Journal of Cell &Tissue Research, 18(3) 6559-6570

Vaidya A., Nair, V. S., Georrge, J. and Singh S.P. 2018. Comparative analysis of thermophilic proteases, Research Journal of Life Sciences, Bioinformatics, Pharaceutical and Chemical Sciences (RJLBPCS) 4(6), P. 66. DOI: 10.26479/2018.0406.05

 

Pandey, S. Sharma, A.K., Solanki, Kiran P. and Singh S.P. January 2018. Catalysis and stability of an extracellular α- amylase from a haloalkaliphilic bacterium as a function of the organic solvents at different pH, salt concentrations and temperatures. Indian Journal of Geo-Marine Sciences (CSIR-NISCARE), 47 (01), 240-248 (IF 0.4).

 

 

 

82 of 85

  

2017

 

Bhatt, H.B., Gohel, S.D. and Singh, S.P. 2017. Phylogeny, Novel bacterial lineage and enzymatic potential of haloalkaliphilic bacteria from the saline coastal desert of Little Rann of Kutch, Gujarat, India. 3 Biotech, 8,53, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13205-017-1075-0 (IF 1.36)

 

Bhatt, H.B., Begum, M.A., Chintalapati, S., Chintalapati, V.R. and Singh, S.P. 2017. Desertibacillus haloalkaliphilus gen. nov.sp. nov., isolated from a salt desert. International Journal of Systematic & Evolutionary Microbiology (IJSEM), 67(11):4435-4442 (IF 2.1)

 

Kikani, B.A., Sharma, A.K. & Singh, S.P. 2017. Metagenomic and Culture-Dependent Analysis of the Bacterial Diversity of a Hot Spring Reservoir as a Function of the Seasonal Variation. International Journal of Environmental Research, 11: 25-38. DOI:10.1007/s41742-017-0003-9 (IF 1.0).

 

Datta, A., Sharma, A., Kundu, R.S. and Singh S.P. 2017. Diversity and enzymatic profile of bacterial flora in the gut of an estuarine fish, Mugil jerdoni. Indian Journal of Geo-Marine Sciences (CSIR-NISCARE), 46(06): 1116-1127 (IF 0.4)

 

83 of 85

Richard Feynman

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Feynman

Richard Phillips Feynman, an American theoretical physicist, known for his work in the path integral formulation of quantum mechanics,

84 of 85

Assignment  Question -1: What are different reasons for the variability in publications among the scientists/students. (One para or 5-7 Points)��Question-2: In the light of the historical background of the citations, discus its implications (One para or 5-7 Points)��Question-3 Discuss the Impact factors of the journals in the context of the assessment of the credentials of the scientists. (One-two para)��Question-4 Highlight the merits of H-Index? (up to 5 Points)��Question-5 List 10 Journals with Impact factors and publishers of your research areas�

85 of 85

Thank you