ARCHIVE<\/h1>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>Inter\u00adnal devel\u00adop\u00adment projects<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n
\nArchive<\/p>\n
2021<\/a>
\n2020<\/a>
\n2019<\/a>
\n2018<\/a>
\n2017<\/a>
\n2016<\/a>
\n< 2016<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>ARCHIVE<\/h2>\n<\/div><\/i><\/i><\/span>Analyz\u00ading Self-citations in Web of Science (GESIS)<\/span><\/a><\/h4><\/div>\nAs the h<\/em>-index becomes the gold standard for measur\u00ading schol\u00adar\u00adly impact, the risk for gaming the system grows. This has spurred the propos\u00adal for report\u00ading a self-citation index (s\u2011index), which aims to add much needed context to calcu\u00adlat\u00aded h<\/em> scores. It also is expect\u00aded to promote good citation habits. A neces\u00adsary step towards using the metric is valida\u00adtion. Here we propose to use the s<\/em>-index to measure how self-citation patterns vary accord\u00ading to differ\u00adent fields, acade\u00adm\u00adic ages, countries, and institutions.<\/p>\nReport: Track\u00ading self-citations in acade\u00adm\u00adic publishing<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/i><\/i><\/span>Apply\u00ading Cross\u00adref license infor\u00adma\u00adtion to identi\u00adfy gold, hybrid and delayed open access publi\u00adca\u00adtions in the KB publi\u00adca\u00adtion corpus<\/span><\/a><\/h4><\/div>\nThe restrict\u00aded access to published, peer-reviewed documents is enforced via a legal frame\u00adwork, which is predom\u00adi\u00adnate\u00adly based upon copyright laws. In the publi\u00adca\u00adtion process authors trans\u00adfer the copyright (or solely the exclu\u00adsive repro\u00adduc\u00adtion rights) to a publish\u00ader and the publish\u00ader uses these rights as a legal instru\u00adment to restrict access to an audience which is willing to pay for obtain\u00ading the right to access the content. Given this perspec\u00adtive any identi\u00adfi\u00adca\u00adtion of OA publi\u00adca\u00adtions must there\u00adfore also be based upon legal infor\u00adma\u00adtion, which defines the access charac\u00adter of the publi\u00adca\u00adtion as imposed by the copyright holder, i.e. the publisher.<\/p>\n
Inspired by the Hybrid OA Dashboard (Jahn, 2017) we there\u00adfore propose to apply licens\u00ading infor\u00adma\u00adtion supplied by publish\u00aders to the publish\u00ader associ\u00ada\u00adtion Cross\u00adref to identi\u00adfy OA publi\u00adca\u00adtion. In detail, we propose to obtain the respec\u00adtive licens\u00ades of Web of Science (or Scopus) indexed publi\u00adca\u00adtions and compare them with a whitelist of estab\u00adlished OA licens\u00ades and annotate the there\u00adby defined OA status of the publi\u00adca\u00adtions in the KB infrastructure.<\/p>\n
Inter\u00adnal devel\u00adop\u00adment projects<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n Archive<\/p>\n 2021<\/a> As the h<\/em>-index becomes the gold standard for measur\u00ading schol\u00adar\u00adly impact, the risk for gaming the system grows. This has spurred the propos\u00adal for report\u00ading a self-citation index (s\u2011index), which aims to add much needed context to calcu\u00adlat\u00aded h<\/em> scores. It also is expect\u00aded to promote good citation habits. A neces\u00adsary step towards using the metric is valida\u00adtion. Here we propose to use the s<\/em>-index to measure how self-citation patterns vary accord\u00ading to differ\u00adent fields, acade\u00adm\u00adic ages, countries, and institutions.<\/p>\n Report: Track\u00ading self-citations in acade\u00adm\u00adic publishing<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div> The restrict\u00aded access to published, peer-reviewed documents is enforced via a legal frame\u00adwork, which is predom\u00adi\u00adnate\u00adly based upon copyright laws. In the publi\u00adca\u00adtion process authors trans\u00adfer the copyright (or solely the exclu\u00adsive repro\u00adduc\u00adtion rights) to a publish\u00ader and the publish\u00ader uses these rights as a legal instru\u00adment to restrict access to an audience which is willing to pay for obtain\u00ading the right to access the content. Given this perspec\u00adtive any identi\u00adfi\u00adca\u00adtion of OA publi\u00adca\u00adtions must there\u00adfore also be based upon legal infor\u00adma\u00adtion, which defines the access charac\u00adter of the publi\u00adca\u00adtion as imposed by the copyright holder, i.e. the publisher.<\/p>\n Inspired by the Hybrid OA Dashboard (Jahn, 2017) we there\u00adfore propose to apply licens\u00ading infor\u00adma\u00adtion supplied by publish\u00aders to the publish\u00ader associ\u00ada\u00adtion Cross\u00adref to identi\u00adfy OA publi\u00adca\u00adtion. In detail, we propose to obtain the respec\u00adtive licens\u00ades of Web of Science (or Scopus) indexed publi\u00adca\u00adtions and compare them with a whitelist of estab\u00adlished OA licens\u00ades and annotate the there\u00adby defined OA status of the publi\u00adca\u00adtions in the KB infrastructure.<\/p>\n
\n
\n2020<\/a>
\n2019<\/a>
\n2018<\/a>
\n2017<\/a>
\n2016<\/a>
\n< 2016<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>ARCHIVE<\/h2>\n<\/div>
<\/i><\/i><\/span>Analyz\u00ading Self-citations in Web of Science (GESIS)<\/span><\/a><\/h4><\/div>
<\/i><\/i><\/span>Apply\u00ading Cross\u00adref license infor\u00adma\u00adtion to identi\u00adfy gold, hybrid and delayed open access publi\u00adca\u00adtions in the KB publi\u00adca\u00adtion corpus<\/span><\/a><\/h4><\/div>
![](\"https:\/\/bibliometrie.info\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/back-to-top.svg\")
![](\"https:\/\/bibliometrie.info\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/back-to-top_hover.svg\")
<\/a><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>