Research Topic

Best Practices in Bibliometrics & Bibliometric Services

About this Research Topic

Most scientometric journals focus on publishing articles dealing with the introduction of new indicators, the exploration of new methodological techniques, the analysis of new instruments and data sources or the collection and comparison of the results traced from different tools. However, articles of a practical nature showing best practices in different institutions, the responsible and sound use of the different metrics, or the offer of new and innovative services for scientists, and administrations and science policymakers, are usually rejected despite being of high interest.
This generates the tendency to favour those scientists who work in their ivory towers and publish an endless number of works without practical use, to the detriment of those ones working from a more practical way, trying to apply correctly indicators and methods, revealing and learning from their deficiencies, and refining and adapting them to suit the needs of the different target groups. The predominance of theoretical publications makes scientometrics a “dead” discipline, in very clear contradiction with its genuine definition according to Pritchard, i.e. the application of mathematics and statistical methods to books and other media of communication.
The increasingly frequent appearance of manifestos and declarations (e.g. San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), Leiden Manifesto, or more recently, the Honk Kong Principles) underlines the need to seek best practices and curb misuse. However, these initiatives are generally reduced to prevent misuse or give recommendations, instead of providing practical guidance.
The purpose of this Research Topic is to gather critical contributions from researchers who are able to share their experiences, initiatives, projects, policies or other insights concerning best practices in bibliometrics.
This Article Collection aims to compile original applied bibliometric knowledge at the micro-, meso- and macro-level, as well as the description of responsible and innovative bibliometric services. It will also help to refrain from bad practices that are affecting the development of this discipline and contributing to its discredit.
Original research papers and review articles are the preferred document types, but other types are also welcome if suitable (see https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/research-metrics-and-analytics#article-types).
Suggested Topics:
- Multidimensional approaches for research assessment
- Responsible use of applied bibliometrics
- New trends in Open Science
- Traditional and new metrics
- Detrimental effects of research assessment practices
- Rethinking and adapting metrics in the praxis
- Limits of bibliometrics and abusive uses
- Best practices of informed peer review
- The use of Big Data in bibliometric services
- Comparative studies of bibliometric uses in scientific policies.


Keywords: bibliometrics, scientometrics, research assessment, best practices, open science, scientific policy


Important Note: All contributions to this Research Topic must be within the scope of the section and journal to which they are submitted, as defined in their mission statements. Frontiers reserves the right to guide an out-of-scope manuscript to a more suitable section or journal at any stage of peer review.

Most scientometric journals focus on publishing articles dealing with the introduction of new indicators, the exploration of new methodological techniques, the analysis of new instruments and data sources or the collection and comparison of the results traced from different tools. However, articles of a practical nature showing best practices in different institutions, the responsible and sound use of the different metrics, or the offer of new and innovative services for scientists, and administrations and science policymakers, are usually rejected despite being of high interest.
This generates the tendency to favour those scientists who work in their ivory towers and publish an endless number of works without practical use, to the detriment of those ones working from a more practical way, trying to apply correctly indicators and methods, revealing and learning from their deficiencies, and refining and adapting them to suit the needs of the different target groups. The predominance of theoretical publications makes scientometrics a “dead” discipline, in very clear contradiction with its genuine definition according to Pritchard, i.e. the application of mathematics and statistical methods to books and other media of communication.
The increasingly frequent appearance of manifestos and declarations (e.g. San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), Leiden Manifesto, or more recently, the Honk Kong Principles) underlines the need to seek best practices and curb misuse. However, these initiatives are generally reduced to prevent misuse or give recommendations, instead of providing practical guidance.
The purpose of this Research Topic is to gather critical contributions from researchers who are able to share their experiences, initiatives, projects, policies or other insights concerning best practices in bibliometrics.
This Article Collection aims to compile original applied bibliometric knowledge at the micro-, meso- and macro-level, as well as the description of responsible and innovative bibliometric services. It will also help to refrain from bad practices that are affecting the development of this discipline and contributing to its discredit.
Original research papers and review articles are the preferred document types, but other types are also welcome if suitable (see https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/research-metrics-and-analytics#article-types).
Suggested Topics:
- Multidimensional approaches for research assessment
- Responsible use of applied bibliometrics
- New trends in Open Science
- Traditional and new metrics
- Detrimental effects of research assessment practices
- Rethinking and adapting metrics in the praxis
- Limits of bibliometrics and abusive uses
- Best practices of informed peer review
- The use of Big Data in bibliometric services
- Comparative studies of bibliometric uses in scientific policies.


Keywords: bibliometrics, scientometrics, research assessment, best practices, open science, scientific policy


Important Note: All contributions to this Research Topic must be within the scope of the section and journal to which they are submitted, as defined in their mission statements. Frontiers reserves the right to guide an out-of-scope manuscript to a more suitable section or journal at any stage of peer review.

About Frontiers Research Topics

With their unique mixes of varied contributions from Original Research to Review Articles, Research Topics unify the most influential researchers, the latest key findings and historical advances in a hot research area! Find out more on how to host your own Frontiers Research Topic or contribute to one as an author.

Topic Editors

Loading..

Submission Deadlines

06 April 2020 Abstract
05 October 2020 Manuscript

Participating Journals

Manuscripts can be submitted to this Research Topic via the following journals:

Loading..

Topic Editors

Loading..

Submission Deadlines

06 April 2020 Abstract
05 October 2020 Manuscript

Participating Journals

Manuscripts can be submitted to this Research Topic via the following journals:

Loading..
Loading..

total views article views article downloads topic views

}
 
Top countries
Top referring sites
Loading..

Comments

Loading..

Add a comment

Add comment
Back to top