Influence of the quality of the bibliographic description on bibliometric scores
https://doi.org/10.20913/1815-3186-2021-2-59-64
Abstract
The influence of the quality of the bibliographic description on the search results in bibliometric data bases is considered. Three basic levels for
bibliometric assessments are proposed. The influence of bibliometric errors on the quality of assessments at each level is shown. It is noted that the level at which the work is carried out with specific authors is the most sensitive. The responsibility for the inaccuracy of bibliographic data in scientometric search engines lies on the generators of information resources of these systems.
About the Authors
V. A. Tsvetkova
Library for Natural Sciences of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Doctor of Sciences (Techn.), Professor, Chief Researcher,
Znamenka str., 11/11, Moscow, 119991
Yu. V. Mokhnacheva
Library for Natural Sciences of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Candidate of Pedagogic Sciences, Leading Researcher,
Znamenka str., 11/11, Moscow, 119991
References
1. Archakov AI, Karpova EA and Ponomarenko EA (2013) International criteria for the effectiveness of research activities of teams and individual scientists in the field of biology and medicine. Vestnik Rossiiskoi akademii nauk 5: 4–9. (In Russ.).
2. Berezkina NYu and Khrenova GS (2010) Using the “Web of Science” databases to assess the results of scientific activities in the Republic of Belarus. Obrazovatel’nye tekhnologii i obshchestvo 13 (3): 311– 316. (In Russ.).
3. Gilyarevsky RS (2014) Publication activity as an assessment of scientific achievements. Nauchnotekhnicheskaya informatsiya. Seriya 1 8: 1–9. (In Russ.).
4. Gureev V, Mazov N and Kalenov N (2017) RSCI database: some estimates of content and possibilities of use. Informatsiya i innovatsii sp. iss: 46–51. (In Russ.).
5. Guskov AE (2015) The Russian science reform as an impetus to develop scientometric research (introductory article). Trudy GPNTB SO RAN 9: 5–13. (In Russ.).
6. Lavrik OL and Glukhov VA (2015) The author’s publication activity in the RSCI: quantitative data as a basis for qualitative analysis. Trudy GPNTB SO RAN 9: 134–146. (In Russ.).
7. Markusova VA (2014) Timetested. Poisk 31/32: 7. (In Russ.).
8. Marshakova-Shaykevich IV (2013) The role of bibliometrics in assessing the research activity of science. Upravlenie bol’shimi sistemami 44: 210–247. (In Russ.). URL: http://ubs. mtas.ru/archive/search_results_new.php?publication_ id=19060
9. [Moskaleva OV (2013) Is it possible to evaluate the work of scientists by bibliometric indicators? Upravlenie bol’shimi sistemami 44: 308–331. (In Russ.). URL: http://ubs.mtas.ru/archive/search_results_ new.php?publication_id=19065
10. Mokhnacheva YuV and Kharybina TN (2010) Providing scientists with bibliometric information in the Central Library of the Pushchino Scientific Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences (LES RAS department). Novye tekhnologii v informatsionnobibliotechnom obespechenii nauchnykh issledovanii. Ekaterinburg, pp. 218–225. (In Russ.).
11. Mokhnacheva YuV, Tsvetkova VA (2017) Opportunities and features of “Web of Science Core Collection”, “Scopus” and RSCI for the analysis of publication flows of scientific organizations. Informatsionnoe obespechenie nauki: novye tekhnologii. Moscow, pp. 50–64. (In Russ.).
12. Tsvetkova VA, Mokhnacheva YuV and Kalashnikova GV (2018) Paradoxes of bibliometric tools. Nauchnye i tekhnicheskie biblioteki 8: 3–19. (In Russ.).
13. Bernal JD (1939) The social function of science. London: Routledge
Supplementary files
Review
For citations:
Tsvetkova V.A., Mokhnacheva Yu.V. Influence of the quality of the bibliographic description on bibliometric scores. Bibliosphere. 2021;(2):59-64. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.20913/1815-3186-2021-2-59-64
Views:
443
Email this article 