DOCSLIB.ORG

CSE's White Paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CSE's White Paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal whitefinal6 10/10/06 2:06 PM Page i CSE’s White Paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications Editorial Policy Committee (2005–2006), Council of Science Editors www.CouncilScienceEditors.org whitefinal6 10/16/06 10:13 AM Page ii CSE’s White Paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications Editorial Policy Committee (2005–2006), Council of Science Editors www.CouncilScienceEditors.org Diane Scott-Lichter (Chair) Acknowledgments Blackwell Publishing, Inc. The CSE Editorial Policy Committee acknowledges the Martin Blume work of the previous committee, which served as a The American Physical Society basis for this paper. Special thanks go to Brenda Bruce Dancik Gregoline, ELS, for her copy and developmental edit- NRC Research Press ing of the aspects of the White Paper created by CSE’s University of Alberta Editorial Policy Committee. Finally,the Committee is Heather Goodell indebted to the CSE Board and reviewers, whose sup- American Heart Association port and timely input made this White Paper possible. Angela Hartley Special thanks to Cadmus Communications for sup- Association of Women’s Health, Obstetric and porting the composition, printing, and providing of Neonatal Nurses PDFs of this version of the White Paper. Michael Kahn Cardinal Health Christine Laine Copyright Annals of Internal Medicine Copyright © 2006 Council of Science Editors. Copying Jennifer Mahar tables, figures, or excerpts with proper attribution is Neuropsychopharmacology allowed for any noncommercial use of this work. Harvey Marcovitch Unless otherwise indicated, all materials on these BMJ Journals pages are copyrighted by the Council of Science BMA House Editors.With the exception of use of tables, figures, or excepts referenced here, reproduction, modification, Stephen Morrissey storage in a retrieval system or retransmission, in any New England Journal of Medicine form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or oth- Debra Parrish erwise, for reasons other than personal use, is strictly Parrish Law Offices prohibited without prior written permission. Deborah Polly American Urological Association Preferred Citation Scott-Lichter D, and the Editorial Policy Committee, Mike Rossner Council of Science Editors. The Journal of Cell Biology CSE’s White Paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Mary Scheetz Publications. Reston,Va: CSE; 2006. Office of Research Integrity Council of Science Editors Anna Trudgett c/o Drohan Management Group Blood 12100 Sunset Hills Road, Suite 130 Michael Vasko Reston,VA 20190 Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Phone: 703–437–4377 John Ward Fax: 703–435–4390 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Email: [email protected] CSE Board Liaison Web: www.councilscienceeditors.org Monica Bradford The full text of the White Paper with updated con- American Association for the Advancement of tent can be accessed without charge through the Science Internet by going to the following URL: http://www. councilscienceeditors.org/editorial_policies/white_ paper.cfm. ii whitefinal6 10/10/06 2:06 PM Page iii Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES IN PUBLISHING 2 2.1 Editor Roles and Responsibilities 2 2.1.1 Editorial Freedom 6 2.1.2 Confidentiality 7 2.1.3 Conflicts of Interest 8 2.1.4 Conflict of Interest Disclosure 10 2.1.5 Editorial Board Participation 11 2.1.6 Timeliness of the Publication Process 12 2.1.7 Errata, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern 12 2.1.8 Addressing Authorship Disputes 13 2.1.9 Appealing Decisions and Reconsideration of Rejected Manuscripts 13 2.1.10 Addressing Allegations or Findings of Misconduct 13 2.2 Authorship 16 2.2.1 Authorship and Contributorship Models 16 2.2.2 Aims of Authorship and Contributorship Models 18 2.2.3 Authors’ Role 18 2.2.4 Copyright Assignment 20 2.2.5 Order of Authorship 20 2.2.6 Anonymous Authorship 20 2.2.7 Group Authorship 20 2.2.8 Deceased Authors 21 2.2.9 Acknowledgments 21 2.2.10 Multiple Submissions 21 2.2.11 Registration of Clinical Trials 22 2.2.12 Editors’ Role 22 2.3 Reviewer Roles and Responsibilities 23 2.3.1 Reviewer Selection 24 2.3.2 Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers 25 2.3.3 Examples of Reviewer Impropriety 26 2.3.4 Using Anonymous Reviewers: Critique of the Process 27 2.4 Sponsor Roles and Responsibilities 28 2.4.1 Authorship/Contributorship 29 2.4.2 Process Control (Content, Direction, and Venue Choice) 29 2.4.3 Disclosure of Funding Sources and Sponsor Involvement 30 iii CSE’s White Paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications whitefinal6 10/10/06 2:06 PM Page iv 2.4.4 Access to and Provision of Data 30 2.4.5 Copyright 30 2.4.6 Sponsor Misconduct and/or Unethical Practices 31 2.5 Relations Between Editors and Publishers, Sponsoring Societies, or Journal Owners 31 2.6 Responsibilities to the Media 34 3.0 IDENTIFYING RESEARCH MISCONDUCT AND GUIDELINES FOR ACTION 36 3.1 Description of Research Misconduct 37 3.1.1 Mistreatment of Research Subjects 37 3.1.2 Falsification and Fabrication of Data 37 3.1.3 Piracy and Plagiarism 38 3.2 International Models for Responding to Research Misconduct 38 3.2.1 National Bodies Responding to the Problem 38 3.2.2 Definition of Research Misconduct 44 3.2.3 The Investigation 47 3.2.4 Post-Investigation Issues 48 3.3 Reporting Suspect Manuscripts 49 3.3.1 Who Might Notify A Journal About A Suspect Manuscript? 49 3.3.2 Whom Should a Journal Notify About a Suspect Manuscript? 50 3.4 Digital Images and Misconduct 52 3.4.1 Guidelines for Handling Image Data 52 3.4.2 Enforcing the Guidelines 53 3.4.3 Procedure for Handling Guideline Violations 54 3.5 Correcting the Literature 55 3.5.1 Definitions 56 3.5.2 Published Guidelines 56 3.5.3 The US Public Health Service 58 3.5.4 The National Science Foundation, Office of Inspector General 59 3.5.5 Processes 59 3.5.6 Editor’s Checklist 62 3.5.7 Examples of Literature Corrections 63 3.6 Handling Third-Party Inquiries About Scientific Misconduct 70 3.6.1 Media 70 3.6.2 Legal Counsel 71 3.6.3 Federal Agencies 71 CSE’s White Paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications iv whitefinal6 10/10/06 2:06 PM Page 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Council of Science Editors and its Editorial Policy Committee encourage everyone involved in the journal publishing process to take responsibility for promoting integrity in scientific journal publishing.This paper will serve as a basis for developing and improving effective practices in achieving that goal. Through this White Paper and other activities, the Editorial Policy Committee aims to open dialogue about ethical publishing practices, inform those involved in the editorial process, and foster informed decision-making by edi- tors.We intend to work with other professional organizations to shape the sci- entific journal environment so that the integrity of our publications is upheld. With the understanding that what may be appropriate for one discipline or organization may not be so for another, the White Paper intends to inform and guide rather than direct. Because there is more published information available from the biomedical community on some of the topics in this paper, more ref- erences or examples in those areas are given. However, our intention is to pro- vide information that is useful to all the sciences.To provide useful and practi- cal support to journal editors, your input is needed to further develop this liv- ing document by pointing out areas that need to be expanded or updated.We will build on the work of this White Paper through the continued work of the Committee and your contributions. Please send comments and suggestions to [email protected] and include “Editorial Policy Committee” in the subject line. (Authorship: Diane Scott-Lichter took the lead in writing this section of the white paper on behalf of the CSE Policy Committee. Members of the Policy Committee and the CSE Board of Directors reviewed and commented on it.This section was formally approved by the CSE Board of Directors on September 13, 2006.) CSE’s White Paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications 1 whitefinal6 10/10/06 2:06 PM Page 2 2.0 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES IN PUBLISHING 2.1 Editor Roles and Responsibilities Editors of scientific journals have responsibilities to the public, the scientific community as a whole, the owners/publishers of their journals, the authors who provide the content of the journals, the peer reviewers who comment on the suitability of manuscripts for publication, and the journal’s readers. Some editor responsibilities to authors are listed below. • Providing guidelines for preparing and submitting manuscripts. • Establishing and enforcing authorship criteria. • Treating all authors with fairness, courtesy, objectivity, and honesty. • Establishing and defining policies on conflicts of interest. • Protecting the confidentiality of every author’s work. • Establishing a system for effective and rapid peer review. • Making editorial decisions with reasonable speed and, when the manuscript is potentially appropriate for the journal, with input from peer reviewers who have adequate expertise to judge the manuscript, and communicating these decisions to authors in a constructive and helpful manner. • Establishing clear guidelines for authors regarding acceptable practices for sharing information before and after publication. • Establishing a procedure for reconsidering editorial decisions (see 2.1.9). • Describing, implementing, and regularly reviewing policies for handling eth- ical issues and allegations or findings of misconduct by authors (see 2.1.10 and part 3). • Informing authors of solicited manuscripts that the submission will be eval- uated according to the journal’s usual procedures or outlining the decision- making process if it differs from those procedures.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Red Letters, White Paper, Black Ink: Race, Writing, Colors, and Characters in 1850S America
    Red Letters, White Paper, Black Ink: Race, Writing, Colors, and Characters in 1850s America Samuel Arrowsmith Turner Portland, Maine B.A., Vassar College, 1997 A Dissertation presented to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Virginia in Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of English University of Virginia August, 2013 ii Abstract It’s well known that both the idea of race and the idea of writing acquired new kinds of importance for Americans in the mid-nineteenth century. Less obvious has been the extent to which the relationship between the two ideas, each charged by antebellum America with an ever-broader range of ideological functions, has itself served for some authors both as an object of inquiry and as a politico-aesthetic vocabulary. “White Paper, Black Ink, Red Letters” concerns this race-writing dialectic, and takes as its point of departure the fact that both writing and race depend on a priori notions of visibility and materiality to which each nonetheless is – or seems to be – irreducible. That is, though any given utterance of racial embodiment or alphabetic inscription becomes intelligible by its materialization as part of a field of necessarily visible signifiers (whether shapes of letters or racially encoded features of the body) the power of any such signifier to organize or regulate experience depends on its perceived connection to a separate domain of invisible meanings. iii For many nineteenth-century Americans race offered an increasingly persuasive narrative of identity at a time when the self-evidence of class, gender, and nationality as modes of affiliation seemed to be waning.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Full White Paper
    Open Access White Paper University of Oregon SENATE SUB-COMMITTEE ON OPEN ACCESS I. Executive Summary II. Introduction a. Definition and History of the Open Access Movement b. History of Open Access at the University of Oregon c. The Senate Subcommittee on Open Access at the University of Oregon III. Overview of Current Open Access Trends and Practices a. Open Access Formats b. Advantages and Challenges of the Open Access Approach IV. OA in the Process of Research & Dissemination of Scholarly Works at UO a. A Summary of Current Circumstances b. Moving Towards Transformative Agreements c. Open Access Publishing at UO V. Advancing Open Access at the University of Oregon and Beyond a. Barriers to Moving Forward with OA b. Suggestions for Local Action at UO 1 Executive Summary The state of global scholarly communications has evolved rapidly over the last two decades, as libraries, funders and some publishers have sought to hasten the spread of more open practices for the dissemination of results in scholarly research worldwide. These practices have become collectively known as Open Access (OA), defined as "the free, immediate, online availability of research articles combined with the rights to use these articles fully in the digital environment." The aim of this report — the Open Access White Paper by the Senate Subcommittee on Open Access at the University of Oregon — is to review the factors that have precipitated these recent changes and to explain their relevance for members of the University of Oregon community. Open Access History and Trends Recently, the OA movement has gained momentum as academic institutions around the globe have begun negotiating and signing creative, new agreements with for-profit commercial publishers, and as innovations to the business models for disseminating scholarly research have become more widely adopted.
    [Show full text]
  • White Paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications, 2012 Update
    CSE’s White Paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications, 2012 Update Editorial Policy Committee (2011-2012) www.CouncilScienceEditors.org CSE’s White Paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications, 2012 Update Editorial Policy Committee (2011-2012) www.CounsilScienceEditors.org Kristi Overgaard (Chair) Daniel Salsbury American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Patricia Baskin Mary Scheetz American Academy of Neurology Research Integrity Consulting, LLC Elizabeth Blalock Diane Scott-Lichter Journal of Investigative Dermatology American Association for Cancer Research Howard Browman Gene P. Snyder Institute of Marine Research, Storebø, Norway Envision Pharma Bruce Dancik Anna Trudgett NRC Research Press, University of Alberta American Society of Hematology Wim D’Haeze Arena Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Editorial Policy Committee (2008-2009) Robert L. Edsall Heather Goodell (Chair) American Academy of Family Physicians American Heart Association Jill Filler Elizabeth Blalock American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics Journal of Investigative Dermatology Heather Goodell Bruce Dancik American Heart Association NRC Research Press, University of Alberta Angela Hartley Robert L. Edsall Association of Women’s Health, Obstetric and Neonatal Nurses American Academy of Family Physicians Kenneth Kornfield Jill Filler American Society of Clinical Neurology American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics Christine Laine Angela Hartley
    [Show full text]
  • Copyright White Paper
    JCI Series No.19 S A R V H Copyright White Paper - A view from the perspective of copyright industries (Vol.3)- August 2009 Japan Copyright Institute Copyright Research and Information Center Copyright White Paper Preface Preface This third edition of the Copyright White Paper, subtitled “Economic Aspects of the Copyright Industry,” has been released more than eight years since the publication of the first edition in November 2000 and the second edition in March of 2005. As reports of this nature are more valuable when published in series rather than as one-off publications, our initial intention was to release a revised white paper every three years. We regret that due to circumstances beyond our control, however, many years have passed before we were finally able to release this new edition. The preface to the November 2000 edition notes a comment by Taichi Sakaiya, the then-Minister of Economic Planning, which was published in the Economic Survey of Japan 2000: “...Japan, a leader in developing a hardware-focused industrial society based on standardized mass production, remained the most advanced country in the world in the development and application of control technology. It lagged behind in the informatization process, however, due to its failure to transform social mindsets, practices and frameworks that were focused on the standardized mass production system.” Japan’s economic growth rate, 3.8% in 1991, fell to -2.8% in 1998. The expansion of the Internet reversed this economic trend, as sales of personal computers finally surpassed those of televisions in 1999 and the popularity of cell phones began to grow dramatically.
    [Show full text]
  • Where Does the Thesis Statement Go in a Research Paper
    Where Does The Thesis Statement Go In A Research Paper Carlo king his pueblo strolls capaciously, but led Vinny never obsecrates so bilingually. Chummy Matias countermarks that Cavell purpling complaisantly and nourish immaculately. Interspinous and elected Carmine gilly scurvily and scrimpy his pandour theoretically and o'clock. We kindly ask questions related topics for her thesis suggests that where the three body paragraphs of level of the internet in order to. Decide that have build your paper thesis in a statement does the research? Should highlight the thesis statement tells your paper that asserts that is this is going to. THESIS STATEMENTWhat is a thesis? When the main point of paper thesis in a statement research the sense of communication, do after you done thorough research in the abstract words, constructing a fictional character to. If such body contains other information, then, the spawn and federal governments should pick those disenfranchised economically with early education about the dangers of smoking. Include a fresh ideas follow and does the thesis statement research paper in a swimsuit on your early education about the amount of. This is any broad. Most research papers begin take a thesis statement at the flesh of an introductory paragraph. You want to your writing: elementary school and will be revised again, a thesis statement research the in paper is. Readers can end of where does the a thesis statement research paper in a better when you get away too vague words, and concise as more. Learn how can take on your paper thesis statement does the research in a concise manner throughout the thesis statement for this article helpful in much time calculator.
    [Show full text]
  • Telehealth Section White Paper
    The following is an exact copy of the original whitepaper written in 2018 by the Telehealth Section of the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) with the omission of the definition of emergency telehealth and the “Preamble.” The preamble was edited by the current ACEP Telehealth Section Chairman for correctness. August 7, 2019. Edward “Etch” Shaheen, MD, FACEP Francis Xavier Guyette MD, MPH, FACEP Associate Professor of Emergency Medicine University of Pittsburgh Medical Director, STAT MedEvac Neal Sikka, MD, FACEP Associate Professor of Emergency Medicine The George Washington University School of Medicine Medical Faculty Associates Hartmut Gross, MD, FACEP Chair, ACEP Emergency Telemedicine (Telehealth) Section Professor of Emergency Medicine and Neurology, Assistant Professor of Pediatrics Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University, Augusta, GA Aditi U. Joshi MD, MSc, FACEP Medical Director, JeffConnect Assistant Professor, Department of Emergency Medicine Thomas Jefferson University Hospital Philadelphia, PA Edward Shaheen, MD, FACEP Founder and CEO Shaheen Consulting, a division of On Call Specialists, Inc. Chair-elect, ACEP Emergency Telemedicine (Telehealth) Section Michael James Baker, MD, FACEP Director of Telehealth, Emergency Physicians Medical Group Adjunct Clinical Instructor, University of Michigan St. Joseph Mercy Hospital, Ann Arbor, MI Adam Ash DO FACEP Progressive Emergency Physicians Uniondale, NY Judd E. Hollander, MD, FACEP SVP for Healthcare Delivery Innovation, Thomas Jefferson University Associate
    [Show full text]
  • Promote Or Perish: Sharing Your Research to Advance Your Science
    RESEARCH NETWORKING CAREER ADVANCE SCIENCE Promote or Perish: PROMOTE Sharing Your Research to Advance Your Science and Your Career WHITE PAPER SHARING publishing.aip.org facebook.com/AIPPublishing @AIP_Publishing linkedin.com/company/aip-publishing INTRODUCTION “Publish or perish.” This well-known concept has been used in academia for decades: to advance in their career, academics must continually publish journal articles to demonstrate value and maintain visibility. The modern-day twist: “promote or perish.” Today, it’s not enough to simply publish research findings in quality journals, you also need to be your own advocate and promote your research. To some scientists, self-promotion not only is uncomfortable, it’s distasteful. In their view, having research published in a reputable journal is enough, especially if the journal has a high impact factor. However, to stand out as a scientist today, it’s also about getting noticed online. And more important, it’s about getting noticed by the right people, the right institutions, and the right influencers who can help you advance your science and your career — and obtain funding. That means being active on social networking platforms. A survey conducted by the Pew Research Center what’s an overworked, time-strapped research in collaboration with the American Association scientist to do? Whether you are a seasoned for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) scientist or an early-career researcher looking (pewinternet.org/2015/02/15/how-scientists- to build your reputation, how do you navigate engage-public/) shows that scientists of all the labyrinth of choices available? generations have started to recognize the importance of sharing and talking about To help you get started, we’ve developed this their research.
    [Show full text]
  • Harnessing the Power of Content
    HARNESSING THE POWER OF CONTENT EXTRACTING VALUE FROM SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE: THE POWER OF MINING FULL-TEXT ARTICLES CONTENTS 1. Executive Summary 3 2. Understanding Biology in the Era of Big Data 4 3. The Challenge of Mining the Scientific Literature 5 4. Manual Curation is a Problematic Option 5-6 5. Text-mining Technology Provides a Better Solution 6 6. A Wide Net is Needed to Capture Relevant Results 7 7. More Facts are Found in Full-Text Articles 8-9 8. Co-occurrences are Often Mentioned in Full-text First 10-11 9. Conclusion 12 ELSEVIER - WHITE PAPER - HARNESSING THE POWER OF CONTENT • 2014 2 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Biological researchers face an overwhelming and constantly growing body of scientific literature that they must search through in order to keep up with developments in their field. Staying up-to-date with new findings is critical, yet seemingly impossible. With more than 1 million new citations in PubMed each year, how can anyone possibly read through all of the relevant full-text articles to uncover important data? For years manual review and curation of scientific publications has been the gold standard, with computer-based solutions ranking far behind in terms of accuracy and completeness. Fortunately times have changed; researchers now have ready access to significant computational power, and the capabilities of text mining software have improved dramatically. Elsevier’s proprietary text-mining technology has proven that well-designed software applications can effectively “read” full-text articles, extracting far more relevant biological information than is found in article abstracts alone, with accuracies comparable to human researchers, and with much higher throughput.
    [Show full text]
  • Co-Authorship in the Humanities and Social Sciences
    Got a query on publishing in a journal? Co-authorship in Looking for advice, the Humanities and support and insights? Social Sciences Visit Taylor & Francis Author Services: supporting researchers from A global view initial idea, through peer review, production, publication and beyond. A white paper from Taylor & Francis authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com Helping you publish your research Join our researcher community: @tandfauthorserv tandfauthorservices authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com © 2017 Taylor & Francis Group CC-BY-NC T&F AS Ad A4P cmyk.indd 1 11/02/2016 14:25 Contents 1 Introduction ................................................................................................... 3 2 Key findings Survey notes and responses ................................................................................. 4 3 Growth of co-authorship .................................................................... 6 Why is co-authorship more common? .................................................................. 7 4 Challenges of co-authorship .......................................................... 8 Listing author names ............................................................................................. 8 Determining authorship ....................................................................................... 10 5 Training and guidance........................................................................ 13 6 The role of journals, editors and reviewers ................. 14 7 Conclusion ................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Open Access at MIT and Beyond: a White Paper of the MIT Ad Hoc Task
    Open Access at MIT and Beyond A White Paper of the MIT Ad Hoc Task Force on Open Access to MIT’s Research © 2018 Massachusetts Institute of Technology Note: This documented was reissued on Monday, September 17, 2018 with corrections to the Educational Materials section in Part II, and a change in task force committee member Karen Shirer’s title. Open Access at MIT and Beyond iii A White Paper of the MIT Ad Hoc Task Force on Open Access to MIT’s Research CONTENTS Acknowledgments ....................................................................................... 4 Introduction ................................................................................................. 5 PART I: The Open Access Landscape in Europe and the United States ....... 6 Open Access in Europe ..................................................................... 6 Open Access in the United States ................................................... 10 Open Access Trends and Tools ....................................................... 12 PART II: Open Access Practices at MIT ...................................................... 14 Publications .................................................................................... 14 Data ............................................................................................. 17 Code ............................................................................................. 18 Educational Materials ......................................................................19 Conclusion ................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Meaningful Metrics: a 21St-Century Librarian's Guide to Bibliometrics, Altmetrics, and Research Impact
    Meaningful METRICS A 21st-Century Librarian’s Guide to Bibliometrics, Altmetrics, and Research Impact Robin Chin Roemer & Rachel Borchardt Association of College and Research Libraries A division of the American Library Association Chicago, Illinois 2015 The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences–Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1992. ∞ Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Meaningful metrics : a 21st century librarian’s guide to bibliometrics, altmetrics, and research impact / edited by Robin Chin Roemer and Rachel Borchardt. pages cm Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-8389-8755-1 (pbk. : alk. paper) -- ISBN 978-0-8389-8757-5 (epub) -- ISBN 978-0-8389-8756-8 (pdf ) -- ISBN 978-0-8389-8758-2 (kin- dle) 1. Bibliometrics. 2. Bibliographical citations--Evaluation. 3. Scholarly publishing--Evaluation. 4. Research--Evaluation--Statistical methods. 5. Communication in learning and scholarship--Technological innovations. I. Roemer, Robin Chin, editor. II. Borchardt, Rachel, editor. Z669.8.M43 2015 010.72’7--dc23 2015006338 Copyright ©2015 by The Association of College & Research Libraries, a division of the American Library Association. All rights reserved except those which may be granted by Sections 107 and 108 of the Copyright Revision Act of 1976. Printed in the United States of America. 19 18 17 16 15 5 4 3 2 1 This work is licensed under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC 4.0 (Attribution-NonCommercial Use) Table of Contents Foreword .................................................................................................v PART 1. IMPACT Chapter 1: Understanding Impact ..................................................3 Chapter 2: Impact in Practice ........................................................13 PART 2.
    [Show full text]
  • CSL Bibliometrics Report 2015-2020
    BIBLIOMETRICS REPORT A Bibliometric Analysis of NOAA CSL Publications 2015 – 2020 Prepared for: NOAA Chemical Sciences Laboratory Prepared by: Sue Visser, Boulder Labs Library January 14, 2021 Table of Contents Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………..2 Part A. General Productivity…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……….3 Part B. Collaboration..……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…….11 Part C. Impact..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…….14 Section 1. Citation Analysis.………………………………………………………………………………………………….…….14 Section 2. Benchmarks.……………………………………………………………………………………………………….…..…16 References……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……….18 Appendix I. Responsible Use of Bibliometrics……………………………………………………………………………….………..19 Appendix II. Method and Data Sources…………………………………………………….………………………………………….…20 List of Tables Table 1. Common bibliometric indicators…………………………………………………………………………………..……………3 Table 2. CSL Top-cited papers………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….5 Table 3 CSL’s 10 highest-cited papers, 2010 – 2014………………………………………………………..........................7 Table 4. Altmetric scores….……………………………………………………………………………………………..………………….…….8 Table 5. Patent citations……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……….…..10 Table 6. Institutional affiliations of CSL coauthors………………………………………………………………………………….…11 Table 7. Country affiliations of CSL coauthors……………………………….…………………………………………………….…..12 Table 8. Institutional affiliations of authors citing CSL publications..………………………………………………….……15
    [Show full text]