Quantifying the influence of scientists and their publications: distinguishing between prestige and popularity

The number of citations is a widely used metric for evaluating the scientific credit of papers, scientists and journals. However, it so happens that papers with fewer citations from prestigious scientists have a higher influence than papers with more citations. In this paper, we argue that by whom the paper is being cited is of greater significance than merely the number of citations. Accordingly, we propose an interactive model of author–paper bipartite networks as well as an iterative algorithm to obtain better rankings for scientists and their publications. The main advantage of this method is twofold: (i) it is a parameter-free algorithm; (ii) it considers the relationship between the prestige of scientists and the quality of their publications. We conducted real experiments on publications in econophysics, and used this method to evaluate the influence of related scientific journals. The comparison between the rankings by our method and simple citation counts suggests that our method is effective in distinguishing prestige from popularity. 5 Author to whom any correspondence should be addressed. Published in " " which should be cited to refer to this work. ht tp :// do c. re ro .c h

[1]  Liang Gao,et al.  Network of Econophysicists: a weighted network to investigate the development of Econophysics , 2004 .

[2]  Sergei Maslov,et al.  Ranking scientific publications using a model of network traffic , 2006, ArXiv.

[3]  Yi Zhao,et al.  Bringing PageRank to the citation analysis , 2008, Inf. Process. Manag..

[4]  Carl T. Bergstrom.  Eigenfactor Measuring the value and prestige of scholarly journals , 2007 .

[5]  J. Hirsch.  Does the h index have predictive power? , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[6]  Emmanuel J Favaloro,et al.  Measuring the quality of journals and journal articles: the impact factor tells but a portion of the story. , 2008, Seminars in thrombosis and hemostasis.

[7]  Anthony F. J. van Raan,et al.  Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods , 2005, Scientometrics.

[8]  Santo Fortunato,et al.  Diffusion of scientific credits and the ranking of scientists , 2009, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[9]  Dag W. Aksnes,et al.  Citation rates and perceptions of scientific contribution , 2006 .

[10]  P. Seglen,et al.  Education and debate , 1999, The Ethics of Public Health.

[11]  Yi-Cheng Zhang,et al.  Leaders in Social Networks, the Delicious Case , 2011, PloS one.

[12]  Linyuan Lu,et al.  Information filtering via preferential diffusion , 2011, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[13]  Kevin W. Boyack,et al.  Indicator-assisted evaluation and funding of research: Visualizing the influence of grants on the number and citation counts of research papers , 2003, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[14]  Sergei Maslov,et al.  Finding scientific gems with Google's PageRank algorithm , 2006, J. Informetrics.

[15]  M. Kendall.  A NEW MEASURE OF RANK CORRELATION , 1938 .

[16]  Yi-Cheng Zhang,et al.  Bipartite network projection and personal recommendation. , 2007, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[17]  B. Frey,et al.  Do Rankings Reflect Research Quality? , 2008, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[18]  D. Sin,et al.  Integrative Approach to Quality Assessment of Medical Journals Using Impact Factor, Eigenfactor, and Article Influence Scores , 2010, PloS one.

[19]  James Caverlee,et al.  PageRank for ranking authors in co-citation networks , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[20]  Santo Fortunato,et al.  How Citation Boosts Promote Scientific Paradigm Shifts and Nobel Prizes , 2011, PloS one.

[21]  M. Trajtenberg.  A Penny for Your Quotes : Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations , 1990 .

[22]  Sergei Maslov,et al.  Optimal ranking in networks with community structure , 2005 .

[23]  J. E. Hirsch,et al.  An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output , 2005, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA.

[24]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Citations: Indicators of significance? , 1989, Scientometrics.

[25]  E GARFIELD,et al.  Citation indexes for science; a new dimension in documentation through association of ideas. , 2006, Science.

[26]  Sergei Maslov,et al.  Promise and Pitfalls of Extending Google's PageRank Algorithm to Citation Networks , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[27]  Ying Fan,et al.  Weighted networks of scientific communication: the measurement and topological role of weight , 2005 .

[28]  Stefano Allesina,et al.  Googling Food Webs: Can an Eigenvector Measure Species' Importance for Coextinctions? , 2009, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[29]  Massimo Franceschet,et al.  The difference between popularity and prestige in the sciences and in the social sciences: A bibliometric analysis , 2010, J. Informetrics.

[30]  H. Stanley,et al.  Methods for measuring the citations and productivity of scientists across time and discipline. , 2009, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.