Bibliometrics, or research impact, is the quantitative method of citation and content analysis for scholarly journals, books and researchers. The quantitative impact of a given publication is appraised by measuring the amount of times a certain work is cited by other resources. By implication, you can measure the influence or 'impact' that a given work has on the rest of academic literature. Bibliometrics should always be supplemented by qualitative peer review and a strong argument on impact in a personal statement.
Bibliometrics is based upon statistical sampling. It is based upon certain assumptions. These assumptions must be accounted for in any appraisal.
In this short video, Dr. Kevin Lalor, School of Social Sciences and Law, Dublin Institute of Technology, highlights some of the limitations of use of journal impact data in the social sciences and humanities and all the types of publication that are missed.
To tell your impact story, you need to find the citation count of your research papers through citation databases and alternative metrics tools. They are key instruments that allow a user to understand the impact of an individual published paper or of a researcher's body of work. Citation databases and altmetrics tools can be used for the following:
 |
It is important to note that not all databases have a complete record of information regarding a certain published item. It would be wise to use multiple databases to fully utilize this feature. |
A Guide to Evaluating Research Performance with Citation Data
"If you can measure that of which you speak, and can express it by a number, you know something of your subject; but if you cannot measure it, your knowledge is meager and unsatisfactory."
~ William Thomson, Lord Kelvin
Handbook Bibliometrics by
Bibliometrics and altmetrics are increasingly becoming the focus of interest in the context of research evaluation. The Handbook Bibliometrics provides a comprehensive introduction to quantifying scientific output in addition to a historical derivation, individual indicators, institutions, application perspectives and data bases. Furthermore, application scenarios, training and qualification on bibliometrics and their implications are considered.
An Introduction to Bibliometrics by
An Introduction to Bibliometrics: New Development and Trends provides a comprehensible, readable and easy to read introduction to bibliometrics. Importantly, the book surveys the latest developments of bibliometrics (such as altmetrics, etc.) and how the field is likely to change over the next decade. In the literature, bibliometrics is generally discussed from one of two perspectives: (1) Purely mathematical/statistical or (2) Its sociological implications. Both approaches are very far from how most users want to apply bibliometrics. This book fills that need by providing tactics on how bibliometrics can be applied to their sphere of scientific activity. Provides readers with an understanding of bibliometric indicators, including their background and significance, classification in quantitative performance, and an evaluation of science and research Includes an overview of the most important indicators, their areas of application, and where and when they should and should not be used Discusses future trends in the quantitative performance evaluation of scientific research
Bibliometrics and Research Evaluation by
Why bibliometrics is useful for understanding the global dynamics of science but generate perverse effects when applied inappropriately in research evaluation and university rankings. The research evaluation market is booming. "Ranking," "metrics," "h-index," and "impact factors" are reigning buzzwords. Government and research administrators want to evaluate everything--teachers, professors, training programs, universities--using quantitative indicators. Among the tools used to measure "research excellence," bibliometrics--aggregate data on publications and citations--has become dominant. Bibliometrics is hailed as an "objective" measure of research quality, a quantitative measure more useful than "subjective" and intuitive evaluation methods such as peer review that have been used since scientific papers were first published in the seventeenth century. In this book, Yves Gingras offers a spirited argument against an unquestioning reliance on bibliometrics as an indicator of research quality. Gingras shows that bibliometric rankings have no real scientific validity, rarely measuring what they pretend to. Although the study of publication and citation patterns, at the proper scales, can yield insights on the global dynamics of science over time, ill-defined quantitative indicators often generate perverse and unintended effects on the direction of research. Moreover, abuse of bibliometrics occurs when data is manipulated to boost rankings. Gingras looks at the politics of evaluation and argues that using numbers can be a way to control scientists and diminish their autonomy in the evaluation process. Proposing precise criteria for establishing the validity of indicators at a given scale of analysis, Gingras questions why universities are so eager to let invalid indicators influence their research strategy. ality. Gingras shows that bibliometric rankings have no real scientific validity, rarely measuring what they pretend to. Although the study of publication and citation patterns, at the proper scales, can yield insights on the global dynamics of science over time, ill-defined quantitative indicators often generate perverse and unintended effects on the direction of research. Moreover, abuse of bibliometrics occurs when data is manipulated to boost rankings. Gingras looks at the politics of evaluation and argues that using numbers can be a way to control scientists and diminish their autonomy in the evaluation process. Proposing precise criteria for establishing the validity of indicators at a given scale of analysis, Gingras questions why universities are so eager to let invalid indicators influence their research strategy. ality. Gingras shows that bibliometric rankings have no real scientific validity, rarely measuring what they pretend to. Although the study of publication and citation patterns, at the proper scales, can yield insights on the global dynamics of science over time, ill-defined quantitative indicators often generate perverse and unintended effects on the direction of research. Moreover, abuse of bibliometrics occurs when data is manipulated to boost rankings. Gingras looks at the politics of evaluation and argues that using numbers can be a way to control scientists and diminish their autonomy in the evaluation process. Proposing precise criteria for establishing the validity of indicators at a given scale of analysis, Gingras questions why universities are so eager to let invalid indicators influence their research strategy. ality. Gingras shows that bibliometric rankings have no real scientific validity, rarely measuring what they pretend to. Although the study of publication and citation patterns, at the proper scales, can yield insights on the global dynamics of science over time, ill-defined quantitative indicators often generate perverse and unintended effects on the direction of research. Moreover, abuse of bibliometrics occurs when data is manipulated to boost rankings. Gingras looks at the politics of evaluation and argues that using numbers can be a way to control scientists and diminish their autonomy in the evaluation process. Proposing precise criteria for establishing the validity of indicators at a given scale of analysis, Gingras questions why universities are so eager to let invalid indicators influence their research strategy. ns, at the proper scales, can yield insights on the global dynamics of science over time, ill-defined quantitative indicators often generate perverse and unintended effects on the direction of research. Moreover, abuse of bibliometrics occurs when data is manipulated to boost rankings. Gingras looks at the politics of evaluation and argues that using numbers can be a way to control scientists and diminish their autonomy in the evaluation process. Proposing precise criteria for establishing the validity of indicators at a given scale of analysis, Gingras questions why universities are so eager to let invalid indicators influence their research strategy.
Handbook of Bibliometric Indicators by
At last, the first systematic guide to the growing jungle of citation indices and other bibliometric indicators. Written with the aim of providing a complete and unbiased overview of all available statistical measures for scientific productivity, the core of this reference is an alphabetical dictionary of indices and other algorithms used to evaluate the importance and impact of researchers and their institutions. In 150 major articles, the authors describe all indices in strictly mathematical terms without passing judgement on their relative merit. From widely used measures, such as the journal impact factor or the h-index, to highly specialized indices, all indicators currently in use in the sciences and humanities are described, and their application explained. The introductory section and the appendix contain a wealth of valuable supporting information on data sources, tools and techniques for bibliometric and scientometric analysis - for individual researchers as well as their funders and publishers.
Meaningful Metrics: a 21St Century Librarian's Guide To by 
Measuring Academic Research by
Measuring Academic Research outlines how to undertake a bibliometric study, a topic of vital importance in academic research today. Scientometrics studies assess scientific productivity and can be applied to all disciplines. Many analyses have been applied in relation to bibliometric studies, but few have shown how to actually carry out the analysis. This book provides a guide on how to develop a bibliometric study, from the first step in which the topic study has to be set, to the analysis and interpretation.
