XXX of Science [XXX=Science, Sociology, Economics]
See also Cosma Shalizi's Sociology of Science.
- PHD Comics: Your (real) Impact Factor; paperscape visualization
- D Geman and S Geman. Opinion: Science in the age of selfies. PNAS, 2016.
- A Schubert. Sentences to remember from the first 100 volumes of the journal Scientometrics. Scientometrics, 2014.
- R Adler, J Ewing, P. Taylor. Citation Statistics. Statistical Science, 2009.
- MV Simkin, VP Roychowdhury. Read before you cite!. Complex System, 2003.
Author collaborations and citations
E Leahey. From Sole Investigator to Team Scientist: Trends in the Practice and Study of Research Collaboration. Annual Review of Sociology, 2016.
D Fanelli, V Larivière. Researchers' Individual Publication Rate Has Not Increased in a Century. PLoS ONE, 2016.
M Coccia, L Wang. Evolution and convergence of the patterns of international scientific collaboration. PNAS, 2016.
- AM Petersen. Quantifying the impact of weak, strong, and super ties in scientific careers. PNAS, 2015.
- CS Wagner et al. Do Nobel Laureates Create Prize-Winning Networks? An Analysis of Collaborative Research in Physiology or Medicine. PLoS ONE, 2015.
- L Wardil, C Hauert. Cooperation and coauthorship in scientific publishing. PRE, 2015.
- P Azoulay, JSG Zivin, J Wang. Superstar Extinction. QJE, 2010.
- F Radicchi, S Fortunato, B Markines, A Vespignani. Diffusion of scientific credits and the ranking of scientists. PRE, 2009.
Y Fan et al. Network of Econophysicists: a weighted network to investigate the development of Econophysics. Int. J. Mod. Phys. B, 2004.
C Haeussler, H Sauermann. The Division of Labor in Teams: A Conceptual Framework and Application to Collaborations in Science. NBER WP #22241, 2016.
- JPA Ioannidis, R Klavans, KW Boyack. Multiple Citation Indicators and Their Composite across Scientific Disciplines. PLoS Biology, 2016.
- U Senanayake, M Piraveenan, A Zomaya. The Pagerank-Index: Going beyond Citation Counts in Quantifying Scientific Impact of Researchers. PLoS ONE, 2015.
- RK Pan, S Fortunato. Author Impact Factor: tracking the dynamics of individual scientific impact. Scientific Reports, 2014.
- J Brogaard, J Engelberg, ED Van Wesep. Why Do We Tenure? Analysis of a Long Standing Risk-Based Explanation. 2016.
- D Pradhan et al. On the Discovery of Success Trajectories of Authors. WWW 2016.
- CA Furtado et al. A Spatiotemporal Analysis of Brazilian Science from the Perspective of Researchers’ Career Trajectories. PLoS ONE 10, e0141528 (2015).
- T Chakraborty et al. Understanding and modeling diverse scientific careers of researchers. Journal of Informetrics, 9(1): 69–78, 2015.
- AM Petersen, O Penner. Inequality and cumulative advantage in science careers: a case study of high-impact journals. EPJ Data Science 3: 24, 2014
- P Deville, D Wang, R Sinatra, C Song, VD Blondel, AL Barabási. Career on the Move: Geography, Stratification, and Scientific Impact. Scientific Reports 4: 4770, 2014.
- F Gargiulo, T Carletti. Driving forces of researchers mobility. Scientific Reports 4, 4860 (2014). arXiv:1312.6061.
PhD study, advisor-advisee
- C Buffington, B Cerf, C Jones, BA Weinberg. STEM Training and Early Career Outcomes of Female and Male Graduate Students: Evidence from UMETRICS Data Linked to the 2010 Census. AER, 2016.
- TRL Collins, R Gilliam, S Peddada and H Xu. Analysis of NIEHS Postdoctoral Alumni Career Outcomes. FASEB Journal, 2016.
- CJF Waaijer et al. Stability and Longevity in the Publication Careers of U.S. Doctorate Recipients. PLoS ONE, 2016.
- F Gargiulo et al. The classical origin of modern mathematics. arXiv:1603.06371.
- M Pezzoni, J Mairesse, P Stephan, J Lane. Gender and the Publication Output of Graduate Students: A Case Study. PLoS ONE 11(1): e0145146, 2016.
- SJ Prenovitz et al. An Evaluation of The Mellon Mays Undergraduate Fellowship's Effect on PhD Production at Non-UNCF Institutions. NBER Working Paper No. 21451. 2015
- A Conti, F Visentin. Science and Engineering Ph.D. Students’ Career Outcomes, by Gender. PLoS ONE 10(8), e0133177 (2015).
- H Horta, JM Santos. The Impact of Publishing During PhD Studies on Career Research Publication, Visibility, and Collaborations. Research in Higher Education, 2015.
- GJ Borjas, KB Doran, Y Shen. Ethnic Complementarities after the Opening of China: How Chinese Graduate Students Affected the Productivity of Their Advisors. NBER Working Paper 21096, 2015.
- X Su. The Impacts of Postdoctoral Training on Scientists’ Academic Employment. Journal of Higher Education. 2013.
- RC Larson, N Ghaffarzadegan, Y Xue. Too Many PhD Graduates or Too Few Academic Job Openings: The Basic Reproductive Number R0 in Academia. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 2013.
- C Wang et al. Mining advisor-advisee relationships from research publication networks. KDD 2010.
RD Malmgren, JM Ottino, LAN Amaral. The role of mentorship in protégé performance. Nature, 2010.
HK Hvide, BF Jones. University Innovation and the Professor's Privilege. NBER WP #22057, 2016.
- The case of the disappearing postdocs
- J Xu, Y Ding, V Malic. Author Credit for Transdisciplinary Collaboration. PLoS ONE 10, e0137968 (2015).
- A Apolloni, JB Rouquier, P Jensen. Collaboration range: Effects of geographical proximity on article impact. Eur Phys J Special Topics 222, 1467-1478 (2013).
- CJ König et al. Are there gender differences among researchers from industrial/organizational psychology?. Scientometrics 2015.
- M Packalen, J Bhattacharya. Age and the Trying Out of New Ideas. NBER Working Paper 20920, 2015. [E. Callaway. Young scientists lead the way on fresh ideas. Nature 518, 283-284, 2015]
Citations and Impact
- Identification of milestone papers through time-balanced network centrality. arXiv:1608.08414.
- X Cao, Y Chen, KJR Liu. A data analytic approach to quantifying scientific impact. Journal of Informetrics, 2016.
- BI Hutchins, X Yuan, JM Anderson, GM Santangelo. Relative Citation Ratio (RCR): A new metric that uses citation rates to measure influence at the article level.
- T Chakraborty et al. On the Categorization of Scientific Citation Profiles in Computer Science. CACM 58, 82-90 (2015).
- PDB Parolo et al. Attention decay in science. Journal of Informetrics 9, 734-745 (2015). arXiv:1503.01881.
DJ de Solla Price. A general theory of bibliometric and other cumulative advantage processes. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 27(5): 292-306, 1976.
L Šubelj, NJ van Eck, L Waltman. Clustering scientific publications based on citation relations: A systematic comparison of different methods. arXiv:1512.09023.
- Independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment.
- L Waltman. A review of the literature on citation impact indicators. arXiv:1507.02099.
- AFJ van Raan. Dormitory of Physical and Engineering Sciences: Sleeping Beauties May Be Sleeping Innovations Part 1: Basic Properties, Cognitive Environment, Characteristics of the Princes. arXiv:1506.01540
- S Maslov, S Redner. Promise and Pitfalls of Extending Google's PageRank Algorithm to Citation Networks. The Journal of Neuroscience, 28(44): 11103-11105, 2008.
Citation network and growth models
- Citation Distance: Measuring Changes in Scientific Search Strategies.
- V Ciotti et al. Homophily and missing links in citation networks. arXiv:1511.07643.
- M Medo, G Cimini, S Gualdi. Temporal Effects in the Growth of Networks. Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 238701, 2011.
- MM King, CT Bergstrom, SJ Correll, J Jacquet, JD West. Men set their own cites high: Gender and self-citation across fields and over time. arXiv:1607.00376.
J Sienkiewicz, EG Altmann. Impact of lexical and sentiment factors on the popularity of scientific papers. Royal Society Open Science, 2016.
A Letchford, HS Moat, T Preis. The advantage of short paper titles. Royal Society Open Science 2(8), 2015.
A Rzhetsky, JG Foster, IT Foster, JA Evans. Choosing experiments to accelerate collective discovery. PNAS 112, 14569-14574 2015.
K McKeown et al. Predicting the impact of scientific concepts using full-text features. JASIST 2016.
- DP Phillips, et al. Importance of the Lay Press in the Transmission of Medical Knowledge to the Scientific Community. NEJM, 1991.
- PE van der Vet, H Nijveen. Propagation of errors in citation networks: a study involving the entire citation network of a widely cited paper published in, and later retracted from, the journal Nature. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 2016.
- P Lee, JD West, B Howe. Viziometrics: Analyzing Visual Information in the Scientific Literature. arXiv:1605.04951.
Map of Science
- MR Guevara et al. The Research Space: using the career paths of scholars to predict the evolution of the research output of individuals, institutions, and nations. arXiv:1602.08409.
- MJ McCabe, CM Snyder. Open Access as a Crude Solution to a Hold-up Problem in the Two-Sided Market for Academic Journals. NBER WP #22220, 2016.
- Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process Fast-tracked PNAS papers are cited less often — but gap is shrinking.
- TC Bergstrom, PN Courant, RP McAfee, MA Williams. Evaluating big deal journal bundles. PNAS, 2014.
Impact and ranking
- Nature Methods Editorial. On impact. Nature Methods 12, 693 (2015).
- L Vana, R Hochreiter, K Hornik. Computing a consensus journal meta-ranking using paired comparisons and adaptive lasso estimators. arXiv:1504.04873.
C Varin, M Cattelan, D Firth. Statistical Modelling of Citation Exchange Between Statistics Journals. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A. arXiv:1312.1794.
V Larivière, S Haustein, P Mongeon. The Oligopoly of Academic Publishers in the Digital Era. PLoS ONE 10, e0127502 (2015).
- C Stegehuis, N Litvak, L Waltman. Predicting the long-term citation impact of recent publications. Journal of Informetrics 9, 642-657 (2015).
- E Sarigöl et al. Predicting scientific success based on coauthorship networks. EPJ Data Science 3:9 2014.
- O Penner, RK Pan, AM Petersen, K Kaski, S Fortunato. On the Predictability of Future Impact in Science. Scientific Reports 3: 3052, 2013.
- V Larivière, Y Gingras, CR Sugimoto, A Tsou. Team size matters: Collaboration and scientific impact since 1900. JASIST 66, 1323-1332 (2015).
- B Baker. The Science of Team Science An emerging field delves into the complexities of effective collaboration. BioScience, 2015.
- Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science. Report Brief.
- YN Lee, JP Walsh, J Wang. Creativity in scientific teams: Unpacking novelty and impact. Research Policy 44, 684-697 (2015).
- S Milojević. Principles of scientific research team formation and evolution. PNAS 111, 3984-3989 (2014).
- BF Jones, S Wuchty, B Uzzi. Multi-university research teams: Shifting impact, geography, and stratification in science. Science 322, 1259-1262 (2008).
- S Wuchty, BF Jones, B Uzzi. The Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge. Science 316, 1036-1039 (2007).
- R Guimerà, B Uzzi, J Spiro, LAN Amaral. Team Assembly Mechanisms Determine Collaboration Network Structure and Team Performance. Science 308, 697-702 (2005).
- VM Nguyen et al. How Long Is Too Long in Contemporary Peer Review? Perspectives from Authors Publishing in Conservation Biology Journals. PLoS ONE 10(8): e0132557, 2015.
- K Siler, K Lee, L Bero. Measuring the effectiveness of scientific gatekeeping. PNAS 112(2): 360-365, 2015.
- AC Spradling. Opinion: NIH must support broadly focused basic research. PNAS, 2016.
- L Lanahan, A Graddy-Reed, MP Feldman. The Domino Effects of Federal Research Funding. PLoS ONE, 2016.
- FC Fang, A Casadevall. Grant funding: Playing the odds. Science, 2016.
- FC Fang, A Bowen, A Casadevall. NIH peer review percentile scores are poorly predictive of grant productivity. eLife 2016.
- MD Lindner, RK Nakamura. Examining the Predictive Validity of NIH Peer Review Scores. PLoS ONE 10(6): e0126938, 2015.
D Li, L Agha. Big names or big ideas: Do peer-review panels select the best science proposals?. Science 348(6233): 434-438, 2015.
- J Mervis. NIH's peer review stands up to scrutiny. Science 348(6233): 384, 2015.
- Funding Data from Publication Acknowledgements: Coverage, Uses and Limitations. arXiv:1604.04896.
- ME Blume-Kohout, D Adhikari. Training the scientific workforce: Does funding mechanism matter?. Research Policy, 2016.
- P Mongeon et al. Concentration of research funding leads to decreasing marginal returns. arXiv:1602.07396.
- Racial bias continues to haunt NIH grants.
- P Cushman et al. Impact of Declining Proposal Success Rates on Scientific Productivity. arXiv:1510.01647.
- JL Rosenbloom et al. The Effects of Research & Development Funding on Scientific Productivity: Academic Chemistry, 1990-2009. PLoS ONE 10, e0138176 (2015).
- PJ Boyle et al. Gender balance: Women are funded more fairly in social science. Nature 525, 181-183 (2015).
- P van den Besselaara, U Sandström. Early career grants, performance, and careers: A study on predictive validity of grant decisions. Journal of Informetrics 9, 826–838 (2015).
- S Nicotri et al. Complex networks and public funding: the case of the 2007-2013 Italian program. EPJ Data Science 4:8, 2015.
- A Ma, RJ Mondragon, V Latora. Funding shapes the anatomy of scientific research. PNAS. arXiv:1505.04941.
- A Gök, J Rigby, P Shapira. The impact of research funding on scientific outputs: Evidence from six smaller European countries. JAIST 2015.
- J Wu. Distributions of scientific funding across universities and research disciplines. Journal of Informetrics, 9: 183–196, 2015
- P Azoulay, JS Graff Zivin, G Manso. Incentives and creativity: evidence from the academic life sciences. The RAND Journal of Economics 42(3): 527-554, 2011.
- A Nobel Lesson: The Grant Behind the Prize. Science 319(5865): 900-901, 2008.
- EC McKiernan et al. How open science helps researchers succeed. eLife, 2016.
- Z Kakushadze. An Index for SSRN Downloads. arXiv:1511.04275.
MJ Kurtz, EA Henneken. Measuring Metrics - A forty year longitudinal cross-validation of citations, downloads, and peer review in Astrophysics. arXiv:1510.09099.
- DR Feenberg, I Ganguli, P Gaule, J Gruber. It's Good to be First: Order Bias in Reading and Citing NBER Working Papers. NBER Working Paper No. 21141, 2015.
- M Thelwall, P Wilson. Mendeley readership altmetrics for medical articles: An analysis of 45 fields. JAIST, 2015.
- E Mohammadi et al. Who reads research articles? An altmetrics analysis of Mendeley user categories. JAIST, 2015.
- R Haunschild, L Bornmann, L Leydesdorff. Networks of reader and country status: An analysis of Mendeley reader statistics. arXiv:1504.07482.
- ‘Novel, amazing, innovative’: positive words on the rise in science papers
- AC Sparavigna, R Marazzato. Using Google Ngram Viewer for Scientific Referencing and History of Science. arXiv:1512.01364.
- J Yun, PJ Kim, H Jeong. Anatomy of Scientific Evolution. PLoS ONE 10(2): e0117388, 2015.
- M Teplitskiy, G Lu, E Duede. Amplifying the Impact of Open Access: Wikipedia and the Diffusion of Science. arXiv:1506.07608.
- LMA Bettencourt, DI Kaiser. Formation of Scientific Fields as a Universal Topological Transition. arXiv:1504.00319
- M Espinosa, C Rondon, M Romero. The use of mathematics in economics and its effect on a scholar's academic career. 2012.
- S Bornholdt, MH Jensen, K Sneppen. Emergence and Decline of Scientific Paradigms. Phys. Rev. Lett. 106: 058701, 2011.
Disciplinary and Interdisciplinarity
- J Wang, R Veugelers, P Stephan. Bias against Novelty in Science: A Cautionary Tale for Users of Bibliometric Indicators. NBER WP #22180, 2016.
- E Omodei, M De Domenico, A Arenas. Evaluating the impact of interdisciplinary research: a multilayer network approach. arXiv:1601.06075.
- MK Enduri, IV Reddy, S Jolad. Does diversity of papers affect their citations? Evidence from American Physical Society Journals. arXiv:1512.05057.
- E Leahey, C Beckman, T Stanko. Prominent but Less Productive: The Impact of Interdisciplinarity on Scientists' Research. arXiv:1510.06802.
- Nature Special Issue on Interdisciplinarity
- The diversity dividend: why interdisciplinarity strengthens research
- A Review of the UK's Interdisciplinary Research using a Citation-based Approach
- J Wang, B Thijs, W Glänzel. Interdisciplinarity and Impact: Distinct Effects of Variety, Balance, and Disparity. PLoS ONE 10(5), e0127298 (2015)
- S Balietti, M Mäs, D Helbing. On Disciplinary Fragmentation and Scientific Progress. PLoS ONE 10(3), e0118747 (2015)
- V Larivière, S Haustein, K Börner. Long-Distance Interdisciplinarity Leads to Higher Scientific Impact. PLoS ONE 10(3): e0122565, 2015.
- E Shapiro. Point of view: Correcting the bias against interdisciplinary research. eLife 3: e02576, 2014.
- B Uzzi, S Mukherjee, M Stringer, B Jones. Atypical Combinations and Scientific Impact. Science 342(6157): 468-472, 2013.
- S Mukherjee, B Uzzi, B Jones, M Stringer. A New Method for Identifying Recombinations of Existing Knowledge Associated with High-Impact Innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management.
- H Sayama, J Akaishi. Characterizing Interdisciplinarity of Researchers and Research Topics Using Web Search Engines. PLoS ONE 7(6): e38747, 2012.
- CE Wills. Analysis of Current and Future Computer Science Needs via Advertised Faculty Searches for 2016.
- WM Williams, SJ Ceci. National hiring experiments reveal 2:1 faculty preference for women on STEM tenure track. PNAS 2015.
- X Wang, S Xu, Z Fang. Tracing Digital Footprints to Academic Articles: An Investigation of PeerJ Publication Referral Data. arXiv:1601.05271.
- J Adams, R Light. Scientific consensus, the law, and same sex parenting outcomes. Social Science Research 53: 300-310, 2015.
- U Shwed, PS Bearman. The Temporal Structure of Scientific Consensus Formation. American Sociological Review 75(6): 817-840, 2010.
Retrieval and Recommendation
- K El-Arini and C Guestrin. Beyond keyword search: discovering relevant scientific literature. In Proc. KDD '11.
- SM Gerrish, DM Blei. A Language-based Approach to Measuring Scholarly Impact. In Proc. ICML '10.
- E Orduna-Malea et al. Methods for estimating the size of Google Scholar. Scientometrics 104 (3), 931-949 (2015).
- M Khabsa, C Lee Giles. The Number of Scholarly Documents on the Public Web. PLoS ONE, 2014.
- S Gershenson, SB Holta, NW Papageorgec. Who believes in me? The effect of student–teacher demographic match on teacher expectations. Economics of Education Review, 2016.
- I Smirnov, S Thurner. Formation of homophily in academic performance: students prefer to change their friends rather than performance. arXiv:1606.09082.
- L Aulck, N Velagapudi, J Blumenstock, J West. Predicting Student Dropout in Higher Education.
- Open Syllabus Project
- PA Hook. Using course-subject Co-occurrence (CSCO) to reveal the structure of an academic discipline: A framework to evaluate different inputs of a domain map. JASIST 2016.
- P Hinrichs. An Empirical Analysis of Racial Segregation in Higher Education. NBER Working Paper No. 21831, 2015.
- C Mollica, L Petrella. Bayesian binary quantile regression for the analysis of Bachelor-Master transition. arXiv:1511.06896.
- Who's downloading pirated papers? Everyone.
- Researcher illegally shares millions of science papers free online to spread knowledge
- China by the numbers. Nature 534, 452–453, 2016.
- S Peng. DeepMeSH: deep semantic representation for improving large-scale MeSH indexing. Bioinformatics, 2016.
- C Catalini, C Fons-Rosen, P Gaulé. Did Cheaper Flights Change the Direction of Science?. 2016.
- Evolution of Reporting P Values in the Biomedical Literature, 1990-2015. JAMA 2016.
- M Costa, BA Desmarais, JA Hird. Science Use in Regulatory Impact Analysis: The Effects of Political Attention and Controversy. arXiv:1512.00448.
- Inside Institutional Networks; Visualising Global Scientific Collaboration.
- JE Kratz, C Strasser. Making data count. Scientific Data 2, 150039 (2015).
- L Wildgaard. A critical cluster analysis of 44 indicators of author-level performance. arXiv:1505.04565.
- D Fialaa, L Šubeljb, S Žitnikb, M Bajec. Do PageRank-based author rankings outperform simple citation counts? Journal of Informetrics, 9(2):334–348, 2015.
- L Bornmann. Interrater reliability and convergent validity of F1000Prime peer review. JAIST, 2015.
- L Bornmann, R. Mutz. Growth rates of modern science: A bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references. JAIST, 2015.
- PM Davis, A Cochran. Cited Half-Life of the Journal Literature. arXiv:1504.07479.
- CP Hoffmann, C Lutz, M Meckel. A relational altmetric? Network centrality on ResearchGate as an indicator of scientific impact. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 2015.
- G Vrettas, M Sanderson. Conferences versus journals in computer science. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 2015.
- Data visualization: Mapping the topical space.
- C Ferreira, et al. The evolution of peer review as a basis for scientific publication: directional selection towards a robust discipline?. Biological Reviews 2015.
- Why Science Needs to Publish Negative Results.
- J Kaiser. U.S. agencies fall in line on public access. Science 348(6231): 167, 2015.
- SG Jantzen, J Jenkinson, G McGill. Transparency in film: increasing credibility of scientific animation using citation. Nature Methods 12, 293–297 (2015).
- Y Wu, S Venkatramanan, DM Chiu. A Population Model for the Academic Ecosystem. arXiv:1503.08312.
- T von Hippel, C von Hippel. To Apply or Not to Apply: A Survey Analysis of Grant Writing Costs and Benefits. PLoS ONE 10(3): e0118494, 2015.
- X Han, G Stocking, MA Gebbie, RP Appelbaum. Will They Stay or Will They Go? International Graduate Students and Their Decisions to Stay or Leave the U.S. upon Graduation. PLoS ONE 10(3): e0118183, 2015.
- DOI URLs
- Thomson Reuters Announces Definitive Agreement to Sell its Intellectual Property & Science Business to Onex and Baring Asia for $3.55 billion
- Artificial-intelligence institute launches free science search engine
- Goals of science vs Goals of scientists (& a love letter to PLOS One)
- Long wait for publication plagues many journals
- Publication delays at PLOS and 3,475 other journals