publishing for impact; elements for a publication strategy
DESCRIPTION
Publish or perish is the old proverb. It is now publish be cited or perish. In this presentation a few tips on publishing for high impact are presented. The tips should be taken into consideration when you develop your personal publication strategy.TRANSCRIPT
Publishing for impact
Wouter Gerritsma, Wageningen UR Library
Elements for a publication strategy
Brief introduction to myself
http://wowter.nethttp://twitter.com/wowterhttp://nl.linkedin.com/in/wowter [email protected]
Publishing tips about:
Roadmap
What is impact?
Journal selection
Networking
Citing and more
What's in a name?
Full screen image with title
Klik op het pictogram als u een afbeelding wilt toevoegen
How are we able to 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 Mathematics
Baselines for Molecular Biology
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 Web of Science: 94
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 Web of Science: 94
Journal: Chemosphere
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 Web of Science: 94
Journal: Chemosphere
Categorised by ESI in Environment/Ecology
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 Web of Science: 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
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 Web of Science: 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
Baseline data to normalize citation data?
Citations data source Baselines
Web of Science ESI or InCites
Scopus SciVal Strata
Google Scholar none
Propriatary A&I database none
H-index
Balance between productivity and citedness
To rule out the effect of one or two highly cited papers
Applicable to authors, journals, research groups, compounds, subjects etc…
But there are some serious doubts about robustness
Waltman, L. & N. J. van Eck (2011). The inconsistency of the h-index. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 63(2):406-415 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.21678
H-index in practice
H-index in practice
Omnipresent h-index
After excellent research, where should you publish?
Where to publish?
A valued journal?
●Editorial board
●Acceptance rates
●Time to publication
●Journal circulation
●Journal visibility
50% of articles generate 90% of all cites
Seglen, P. O. (1997). Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. BMJ 314(7079): 497-502. http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/314/7079/497
Look at the IF in a different way
Journal quality and impact global universities
Highlighting Dutch Universities
But where is Maastricht?
Journal quality and article impact 2003-2009, for Wageningen UR
Journal Quartile Pubs RI T10(%T10) T1(%T1)
Q 1 7170 2.26 2444(34%) 505(7%)
Q 2 2919 1.26 578 (20%) 61 (2%)
Q 3 1303 0.93 143 (11%) 10 (1%)
Q 4 587 0.66 30 (5%) 6 (1%)
Aggregate 11917 1.79 3195(27%) 582(5%)
Source: Wageningen Yield, Feb. 2012
Document type and article impact 2003-2009, for Wageningen UR
Document type Pubs RI T10(%T10) T1(%T1)
Article 11212 1.62 2777(25%) 437( 4%)
Review 705 4.45 418 (59%) 145(21%)
Aggregate 11917 1.79 3195(27%) 582(5%)
Source: Wageningen Yield, Feb. 2012
The impact factor Matthew effect
The journal in which papers are published have a strong influence on their citation rates, as duplicate papers published in high-impact journals obtain, on average, twice as many citations as their identical counterparts published in journals with lower impact factors..
Larivière, V. and Y. Gingras (2010). The impact factor's Matthew Effect: A natural experiment in bibliometrics. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 61(2): 424-427. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.21232
Where you publish matters most
We find from this study that journal-level factors outperform other factors in predicting citations to scholarly outputs. In other words, where you publish is the primary determinant of how many citations your work will receive in the future.
Peng, T.-Q. & J.J.H. Zhu (2012). Where you publish matters most: A multilevel analysis of factors affecting citations of internet studies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(9): 1789-1803 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.22649
Final word on journal quality
It is better to publish one paper in a quality journal than multiple papers in lesser journals. [...]. Try to publish in journals that have high impact factors; chances are your paper will have high impact, too, if accepted.
Bourne, P. E. (2005). Ten Simple Rules for Getting Published. PLoS Computational Biology 1(5): e57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.0010057
Networking
International cooperation
No Cooperation International CooperationUniversity % output Impact % output ImpactEUR 16 1.13 40 2.00RUG 23 1.07 39 1.43RUN 20 0.94 39 1.46TUD 33 1.24 43 1.52TUE 29 1.50 41 1.52UL 20 0.90 46 1.38UM 16 0.90 42 1.48UT 33 1.33 37 1.36UU 21 1.54 39 1.61UvA 20 1.15 43 1.64UvT 25 1.15 42 1.21VUA 18 1.15 43 1.68
WUR 21 1.12 49 1.27 Aggregate 25 1.15 44 1.53
NOWT (2008). Wetenschaps- en Technologie- Indicatoren 2008. Maastricht, Nederlands Observatorium van Wetenschap en Technologie (NOWT).
Cooperation is effective
WTI2 report 2011
Cooperation...
Teams increasingly dominate solo authors in the production of knowledge. Research is increasingly done in teams across nearly all fields.
Teams typically produce more frequently cited research than individuals do, and this advantage has been increasing over time.
Teams now also produce the exceptionally high-impact research, even where that distinction was once the domain of solo authors.
Wuchty, S., B. F. Jones, et al. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science 316(5827): 1036-1039. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1136099
King, C. (2012). Multiauthor Papers: Onward and Upward. ScienceWatch Newsletter, July 2012. http://archive.sciencewatch.com/newsletter/2012/201207/multiauthor_papers/
Networking is important
Start early, make use of Social Networking tools
●Social networks for scientists
●Mendeley, Academics.edu, Researchgate.net
On social networking
And social media
McKenzie and Özler (2011) The impact of economics blogs
Consider the Wikipedia
For better or worse, people are guided to Wikipedia when searching the Web for biomedical information. So there is an increasing need for the scientific community to engage with Wikipedia to ensure that the information it contains is accurate and current.
Logan, D.W., M. Sandal, P.P. Gardner, M. Manske & A. Bateman (2010). Ten Simple Rules for Editing Wikipedia. PLoS Comput Biol, 6(9): e1000941 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000941
Self citations and more
Self citations
The model [...] implies that external citations are enhanced by self-citations, so that we have the “chain reaction:” Larger size leads to more self-citations, which lead to more external citations.
11/28
van Raan, A. F. J. (2008). Self-citation as an impact-reinforcing mechanism in the science system. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 59(10): 1631-1643.
More on references
Articles that cite more references are in turn cited more themselves
Webster, G. D., P. K. Jonason, et al. (2009). Hot Topics and Popular Papers in Evolutionary Psychology: Analyses of Title Words and Citation Counts in Evolution and Human Behavior, 1979 – 2008. Evolutionary Psychology 7(3): 348-362. http://www.epjournal.net/filestore/ep07348362.pdf
To be the best, cite the bestBorrowed from: Corbyn, Z. (2010). "To be the best, cite the best." Nature News, 13 October 2010, http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/news.2010.539 Reporting on the publication of Bornmann, L., F. de Moya Anegón, et al. (2010). Do Scientific Advancements Lean on the Shoulders of Giants? A Bibliometric Investigation of the Ortega Hypothesis. PLoS ONE 5(10): e13327 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0013327.
More articles per research project?
Publishing more articles results in higher citation counts if the articles provide sufficient substantive content to other researchers.
●Beware of the ethical standards
●Bornmann looked at total citations, not to relative impact
Bornmann, L. & H.-D. Daniel (2007). Multiple publication on a single research study: Does it pay? The influence of number of research articles on total citation counts in biomedicine. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(8): 1100-1107 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.20531
Journal selection and referencing with multidisciplinary research
Higher citations are linked to the citation-intensive disciplines.
● But Larivière et al. looked at absolute citations rather that relative to the field
Articles citing citation-intensive disciplines are more likely to be cited by those disciplines and, hence, obtain higher citation scores than would articles citing non-citation-intensive disciplines.
Larivière, V. & Y. Gingras (2010). On the relationship between interdisciplinarity and scientific impact. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(1): 126-131 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.21226
Consider Open Access publishing
Be aware of your copyrights when publishing
Golden Road
●PloS Journals, BMC, etc.
Green Road
●Self archived copies (final author’s version)
●MU Repository, RePec, SSRN etc.
Open Choice
●Hybrid system, author pays and library pays
●Sage model (only 10% of standard fees)
Is there a citation advantage for OA?
Evidence is mounting
●There is certainly no dis-advantange
●Van Raan has started to self archive his preprints
●Most publishers allow self archiving of the final peer reviewed authors version
●Open Citation Project
OA is important for developing countriesEvans, J.A., Reimer, J., 2009. Open access and global participation in science. Science. 323, 1025. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1154562
Publish your data!
Henneken et al. (2011) "articles with links to data result in higher citation rates than articles without such links"
http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.3618
Piwowar et al. (2007) "Sharing detailed research data is associated with increased citation rate
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0000308
Also relevant in the view of the latest developments
(KNAW)
Library assists in curating datasets
What is in a name?
Who is the author of this thesis?
On the inside
On her own publication list
Thank you!
On the Web:@wowterwowter.netwww.slideshare.net/wowter
http://tinyurl.com/7r67fmm