Journal: Scientometrics

Volume 117, Issue 1

1 -- 8Toni Cunillera, Georgina Guilera. Twenty years of statistical learning: from language, back to machine learning
9 -- 24You Song, Fangling Situ, Hongjun Zhu, Jinzhi Lei. To be the Prince to wake up Sleeping Beauty: the rediscovery of the delayed recognition studies
25 -- 43Rosa Rodriguez-Sánchez, Jose A. García, J. Fdez-Valdivia. Editorial decisions with informed and uninformed reviewers
45 -- 60Doris Klingelhöfer, David A. Groneberg, Markus Braun, Dörthe Brüggmann, Jenny Jaque. Fifteen years after September 11: Where is the medical research heading? A scientometric analysis
61 -- 84Shuo Xu, Junwan Liu, Dongsheng Zhai, Xin An, Zheng Wang, Hongshen Pang. Overlapping thematic structures extraction with mixed-membership stochastic blockmodel
85 -- 103Yang Li, Huajiao Li, Nairong Liu, Xueyong Liu. Important institutions of interinstitutional scientific collaboration networks in materials science
105 -- 121Tolga Yuret. Path to success: an analysis of US educated elite academics in the United States
123 -- 139Rogelio Basurto-Flores, Lev Guzmán-Vargas, S. Velasco, Alejandro Medina, Antonio Calvo-Hernández. On entropy research analysis: cross-disciplinary knowledge transfer
141 -- 162Santiago Ruiz-Navas, Kumiko Miyazaki. A complement to lexical query's search-term selection for emerging technologies: the case of "big data"
163 -- 173Michael Quayle, Maura Adshead. The resilience of regional African HIV/AIDS research networks to the withdrawal of international authors in the subfield of public administration and governance: lessons for funders and collaborators
175 -- 189Robert Tomaszewski. A comparative study of citations to chemical encyclopedias in scholarly articles: Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology and Ullmann's Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry
191 -- 209Wen Lou, Yuehua Zhao, Yuchen Chen, Jin Zhang. Research or management? An investigation of the impact of leadership roles on the research performance of academic administrators
211 -- 226Baitong Chen, Ying Ding, Feicheng Ma. Semantic word shifts in a scientific domain
227 -- 247Valeria Aman. A new bibliometric approach to measure knowledge transfer of internationally mobile scientists
249 -- 269A. Basu, Patricia Foland, Geoffrey M. Holdridge, Robert D. Shelton. China's rising leadership in science and technology: quantitative and qualitative indicators
271 -- 291Lin Zhang 0004, Beibei Sun, Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Lixin Chen, Ying Huang. Interdisciplinarity and collaboration: on the relationship between disciplinary diversity in departmental affiliations and reference lists
293 -- 312Igor Barahona, Daria Micaela Hernandez, Hector Hugo Perez-Villarreal, María Pilar Martínez-Ruiz. Identifying research topics in marketing science along the past decade: a content analysis
313 -- 329Peter Van den Besselaar, Ulf Sandström, Hélène Schiffbaenker. Studying grant decision-making: a linguistic analysis of review reports
331 -- 349John McLevey, Alexander V. Graham, Reid McIlroy-Young, Pierson Browne, Kathryn S. Plaisance. Interdisciplinarity and insularity in the diffusion of knowledge: an analysis of disciplinary boundaries between philosophy of science and the sciences
351 -- 380Dominik Heinisch, Guido Buenstorf. The next generation (plus one): an analysis of doctoral students' academic fecundity based on a novel approach to advisor identification
381 -- 390Wen Zhou 0006, Jiayi Gu, Yifan Jia. h-Index-based link prediction methods in citation network
391 -- 407David Hsiehchen, Magdalena Espinoza, Antony Hsieh. Evolution of collaboration and optimization of impact: self-organization in multinational research
409 -- 426Balazs Györffy, Andrea Magda Nagy, Péter Herman, Ádám Török. Factors influencing the scientific performance of Momentum grant holders: an evaluation of the first 117 research groups
427 -- 447Hugo Horta. The declining scientific wealth of Hong Kong and Singapore
449 -- 472Sabrina L. Woltmann, Lars Alkaersig. Tracing university-industry knowledge transfer through a text mining approach
473 -- 493Zhao Qu. Electromobility research in Germany and China: structural differences
495 -- 509Liwei Zhang, Jue Wang 0009. Why highly cited articles are not highly tweeted? A biology case
511 -- 526Jinseok Kim 0001, Jenna Kim. The impact of imbalanced training data on machine learning for author name disambiguation
527 -- 562Robin Cowan, Giulia Rossello. Emergent structures in faculty hiring networks, and the effects of mobility on academic performance
563 -- 578Radek Zdenek, Jana Lososová. An analysis of editorial board members' publication output in agricultural economics and policy journals
579 -- 590Alireza Abbasi, Mahdi Jalili, Abolghasem Sadeghi-Niaraki. Influence of network-based structural and power diversity on research performance
591 -- 602Fengqing Zhang, Erjia Yan, Xin Niu, Yongjun Zhu. Joint modeling of the association between NIH funding and its three primary outcomes: patents, publications, and citation impact
603 -- 613Kim Holmberg, Han Woo Park. An altmetric investigation of the online visibility of South Korea-based scientific journals
615 -- 624Johanna M. Askeridis. An h index for Mendeley: comparison of citation-based h indices and a readership-based h men index for 29 authors
625 -- 629David E. Allen, Michael McAleer. Fake news and indifference to scientific fact: President Trump's confused tweets on global warming, climate change and weather
631 -- 635Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva. The Google Scholar h-index: useful but burdensome metric
637 -- 640Lutz Bornmann. Field classification of publications in Dimensions: a first case study testing its reliability and validity
641 -- 645Christian Herzog 0005, Brian Kierkegaard Lunn. Response to the letter 'Field classification of publications in Dimensions: a first case study testing its reliability and validity'
647 -- 650K. Brad Wray. A note on measuring normal science
651 -- 654Eugenio Petrovich. Reply to Wray
655 -- 666Nina Lykke. Can't bibliometric analysts do better? How quality assessment without field expertise does not work - A comment on G. Madison and T. Söderlund: Comparisons of scientific quality indicators across peer-reviewed journal articles with more or less gender perspective: Gender studies can do better