The Skewness of Science.
Saved in:
| Title: | The Skewness of Science. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Seglen, Per O.1,2 |
| Source: | Journal of the American Society for Information Science. Oct1992, Vol. 43 Issue 9, p628-638. 11p. |
| Subjects: | Documentation, Acquisition of scientific publications, Bibliography, Distribution (Probability theory), Universities & colleges, Probability theory |
| Abstract: | Scientific publications are cited to a variable extent. Distributions of article citedness are therefore found to be very skewed even for articles written by the same author, approaching linearity in a semilog plot. It is suggested that this pattern reflects a basic probability distribution with some similarity to the upper part of a normal (Gaussian) distribution. Such a distribution would be expected for various kinds of highly specialized human activity, parallels being found in the distribution of performance by top athletes and in the publication activity of university scientists. A similar skewness in the distribution of mean citedness of different authors may combine with the variability in citedness of each author's articles to form a two-leveled citational hierarchy. Such a model would be capable of accounting for the extremely skewed distribution of citedness observed for all articles within a scientific field, which approaches linearity in a double-log rather than in a semilog plot. The skewness Implies that there will always be a large fraction of uncited publications, the size of the fraction depending on the citation practices (such as the number of references per publication) within the field in question. However, as part of a continuous probability distribution even uncited articles have a definite probability of contributing to scientific progress. Since It is further-more impossible to eliminate uncited articles for statistical reasons, they should be the cause of neither worry nor remedy. The citational variability between articles in a journal is less (semilog linearity) than in the corresponding field as a whole, suggesting that each Journal represents a select, stratified sample of the field. However, the variability is still too large to make the journal Impact factor (the average citedness of the journal's articles) suitable as a parameter for evaluation of science. Fifteen percent of a journal's articles collect 50% of the citations, and the most cited half of the articles account for nearly 90% of the citations. Awarding the same value to all articles would therefore tend to conceal rather than to bring out differences between the contributing authors. The skewness in the citedness distribution of each author's articles, the large overlap between different authors and the existence of field-dependent systematic differences in citedness would seem to make even article citations unsuitable for evaluation of individual scientists or research groups. At the national level, citations may be more useful, provided due corrections are made for the field effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of the American Society for Information Science is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Engineering Source |
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Text: Availability: 0 |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: egs DbLabel: Engineering Source An: 16792010 AccessLevel: 6 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: The Skewness of Science. – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Seglen%2C+Per+O%2E%22">Seglen, Per O.</searchLink><relatesTo>1,2</relatesTo> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Journal+of+the+American+Society+for+Information+Science%22">Journal of the American Society for Information Science</searchLink>. Oct1992, Vol. 43 Issue 9, p628-638. 11p. – Name: Subject Label: Subjects Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Documentation%22">Documentation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Acquisition+of+scientific+publications%22">Acquisition of scientific publications</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Bibliography%22">Bibliography</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Distribution+%28Probability+theory%29%22">Distribution (Probability theory)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Universities+%26+colleges%22">Universities & colleges</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Probability+theory%22">Probability theory</searchLink> – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Scientific publications are cited to a variable extent. Distributions of article citedness are therefore found to be very skewed even for articles written by the same author, approaching linearity in a semilog plot. It is suggested that this pattern reflects a basic probability distribution with some similarity to the upper part of a normal (Gaussian) distribution. Such a distribution would be expected for various kinds of highly specialized human activity, parallels being found in the distribution of performance by top athletes and in the publication activity of university scientists. A similar skewness in the distribution of mean citedness of different authors may combine with the variability in citedness of each author's articles to form a two-leveled citational hierarchy. Such a model would be capable of accounting for the extremely skewed distribution of citedness observed for all articles within a scientific field, which approaches linearity in a double-log rather than in a semilog plot. The skewness Implies that there will always be a large fraction of uncited publications, the size of the fraction depending on the citation practices (such as the number of references per publication) within the field in question. However, as part of a continuous probability distribution even uncited articles have a definite probability of contributing to scientific progress. Since It is further-more impossible to eliminate uncited articles for statistical reasons, they should be the cause of neither worry nor remedy. The citational variability between articles in a journal is less (semilog linearity) than in the corresponding field as a whole, suggesting that each Journal represents a select, stratified sample of the field. However, the variability is still too large to make the journal Impact factor (the average citedness of the journal's articles) suitable as a parameter for evaluation of science. Fifteen percent of a journal's articles collect 50% of the citations, and the most cited half of the articles account for nearly 90% of the citations. Awarding the same value to all articles would therefore tend to conceal rather than to bring out differences between the contributing authors. The skewness in the citedness distribution of each author's articles, the large overlap between different authors and the existence of field-dependent systematic differences in citedness would seem to make even article citations unsuitable for evaluation of individual scientists or research groups. At the national level, citations may be more useful, provided due corrections are made for the field effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] – Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright Label: Group: Ab Data: <i>Copyright of Journal of the American Society for Information Science is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=egs&AN=16792010 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199210)43:9<628::AID-ASI5>3.0.CO;2-0 Languages: – Code: eng Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 11 StartPage: 628 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Documentation Type: general – SubjectFull: Acquisition of scientific publications Type: general – SubjectFull: Bibliography Type: general – SubjectFull: Distribution (Probability theory) Type: general – SubjectFull: Universities & colleges Type: general – SubjectFull: Probability theory Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: The Skewness of Science. Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Seglen, Per O. IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 10 Text: Oct1992 Type: published Y: 1992 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 00028231 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 43 – Type: issue Value: 9 Titles: – TitleFull: Journal of the American Society for Information Science Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
