Citation success of different publication types: a case study on all references in psychology publications from the German-speaking countries (D–A–CH–L–L) in 2009, 2010, and 2011

Scientometric data on the citation success of different publication types and publication genres in psychology publications are presented. Data refer to references that are cited in these scientific publications and that are documented in PSYNDEX, the exhaustive database of psychology publications from the German-speaking countries either published in German or in English language. Firstly, data analyses refer to the references that are cited in publications of 2009 versus 2010 versus 2011. With reference to all cited references, the portion of journal articles ranges from 57 to 61 %, of books from 22 to 24 %, and of book chapters from 14 to 15 %, with a rather high stability across the three publication years analysed. Secondly, data analyses refer to the numbers of cited references from the German-speaking countries, which are also documented in PSYNDEX. These compose about 11 % of all cited references indicating that nearly 90 % of the references cited are of international and/or interdisciplinary publications not stemming from the German-speaking countries. The subsample shows the proportion of journal articles, books, and chapters, and these are very similar to the percentages identified for all references that are cited. Thirdly, analyses refer to document type, scientific genre, and psychological sub-discipline of the most frequently cited references in the psychology publications. The frequency of top-cited references of books and book chapters is almost equal to that of journal articles; two-thirds of the top-cited references are non-empirical publications, only one-third are empirical publications. Top-cited references stem particularly from clinical psychology, experimental psychology, as well as tests, testing and psychometrics. In summary, the results point to the fact that citation analyses, which are limited to journal papers, tend to neglect very high portions of references that are cited in scientific publications.

[1]  T. V. Leeuwen.  Bibliometric research evaluations, Web of Science and the Social Sciences and Humanities: a problematic relationship? , 2013 .

[2]  Joost C. F. de Winter,et al.  The expansion of Google Scholar versus Web of Science: a longitudinal study , 2013, Scientometrics.

[3]  Henk F. Moed,et al.  Opinion paper: thoughts and facts on bibliometric indicators , 2012, Scientometrics.

[4]  Henk F. Moed,et al.  A bibliometric approach to tracking international scientific migration , 2014, Scientometrics.

[5]  Norma Graciela Cuellar,et al.  Impact Factor , 2016, Journal of transcultural nursing : official journal of the Transcultural Nursing Society.

[6]  D. Hicks.  The Four Literatures of Social Science , 2004 .

[7]  魏屹东,et al.  Scientometrics , 2018, Encyclopedia of Big Data.

[8]  Günter Krampen,et al.  Introduction and some Ideas as well as Visions on an Open Access European Psychology Publication Platform , 2009 .

[9]  Alvin,et al.  Thesaurus of psychological index terms, 7th ed. , 1994 .

[10]  Gabriel Schui,et al.  Krampen, Günter (Hrsg.): Internationalität und Internationalisierung der deutschsprachigen Psychologie : Fakten, Bewertungen, Erfahrungen und Empfehlungen von Experten , 2005 .

[11]  Henk F. Moed,et al.  Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research: The Use of Publication and Patent Statistics in Studies of S&T Systems , 2004 .

[12]  Antonio Cavacini.  What is the best database for computer science journal articles? , 2014, Scientometrics.

[13]  Pedro Albarrán,et al.  A comparison of the scientific performance of the U.S. and the European Union at the turn of the XXI century , 2009 .

[14]  Jian Wang,et al.  How to improve the prediction based on citation impact percentiles for years shortly after the publication date? , 2013, J. Informetrics.

[15]  Bela Gipp,et al.  Academic Search Engine Spam and Google Scholar's Resilience Against it , 2010 .

[16]  Peder Olesen Larsen,et al.  The rate of growth in scientific publication and the decline in coverage provided by Science Citation Index , 2010, Scientometrics.

[17]  Nei Yoshihiro Soma,et al.  Benford’s Law and articles of scientific journals: comparison of JCR® and Scopus data , 2013, Scientometrics.

[18]  Tim C. E. Engels,et al.  The representation of the social sciences and humanities in the Web of Science—a comparison of publication patterns and incentive structures in Flanders and Norway (2005–9) , 2012 .

[19]  Rafael Aleixandre-Benavent,et al.  The Impact Factor in non-English-speaking countries , 2012, Scientometrics.

[20]  Pei-Shan Chi.  Which role do non-source items play in the social sciences? A case study in political science in Germany , 2014, Scientometrics.

[21]  John Mingers,et al.  Counting the citations: a comparison of Web of Science and Google Scholar in the field of business and management , 2010, Scientometrics.

[22]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  Philosophy of science viewed through the lense of “Referenced Publication Years Spectroscopy” (RPYS) , 2014, Scientometrics.

[23]  Reinhold Kliegl,et al.  International collaboration in psychology is on the rise , 2010, Scientometrics.

[24]  M. Freitas,et al.  The Impact Factor , 2013 .

[25]  Ulrich Schmoch,et al.  Impact of bibliometric studies on the publication behaviour of authors , 2013, Scientometrics.

[26]  Philipp Mayr,et al.  An exploratory study of Google Scholar , 2007, Online Inf. Rev..

[27]  Lisa Gallagher Tuleya.  Thesaurus of psychological index terms , 2007 .

[28]  Benno Torgler,et al.  Citation success over time: theory or empirics? , 2012, Scientometrics.

[29]  Isidro F. Aguillo.  Is Google Scholar useful for bibliometrics? A webometric analysis , 2012, Scientometrics.