IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/infome/v15y2021i3s1751157721000341.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Use of Benford's law on academic publishing networks

Author

Listed:
  • Tošić, Aleksandar
  • Vičič, Jernej

Abstract

Benford's law, also known as the first-digit law, has been widely used to test for anomalies in various data ranging from accounting fraud detection, stock prices, and house prices to electricity bills, population numbers, and death rates. Scientific collaboration graphs have been studied extensively as data availability increased. Most research was oriented towards analysing patterns and typologies of citation graphs and co-authorship graphs. Most countries group publications into categories in an attempt to objectively measure research output. However, the scientific community is complex and heterogeneous. Additionally, scientific fields may have different publishing cultures, which make creating a unified metric for evaluating research output problematic. In complex systems like these, it is important to regularly observe potential anomalies and examine them more carefully in an attempt to either improve the evaluation model or find potential loopholes and misuses. In this paper, we examine the potential application of Benford's law on the official research database of Slovenia. We provide evidence that metrics such as number of papers per researcher conform to Benford's distribution, while the number of authors per paper does not. Additionally, we observe some anomalies and provide potential reasoning behind them.

Suggested Citation

  • Tošić, Aleksandar & Vičič, Jernej, 2021. "Use of Benford's law on academic publishing networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:15:y:2021:i:3:s1751157721000341
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2021.101163
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157721000341
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joi.2021.101163?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fewster, R. M., 2009. "A Simple Explanation of Benford's Law," The American Statistician, American Statistical Association, vol. 63(1), pages 26-32.
    2. Leydesdorff, Loet & Wagner, Caroline S., 2008. "International collaboration in science and the formation of a core group," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 317-325.
    3. Batagelj, Vladimir & Maltseva, Daria, 2020. "Temporal bibliographic networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(1).
    4. Borut Lužar & Zoran Levnajić & Janez Povh & Matjaž Perc, 2014. "Community Structure and the Evolution of Interdisciplinarity in Slovenia's Scientific Collaboration Network," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(4), pages 1-5, April.
    5. Maria Benavent-Pérez & Juan Gorraiz & Christian Gumpenberger & Félix Moya-Anegón, 2012. "The different flavors of research collaboration: a case study of their influence on university excellence in four world regions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(1), pages 41-58, October.
    6. Mario Karlovčec & Dunja Mladenić, 2015. "Interdisciplinarity of scientific fields and its evolution based on graph of project collaboration and co-authoring," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 433-454, January.
    7. Druică, Elena & Oancea, Bogdan & Vâlsan, Călin, 2018. "Benford's law and the limits of digit analysis," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 75-82.
    8. Vincent Larivière & Éric Archambault & Yves Gingras & Étienne Vignola‐Gagné, 2006. "The place of serials in referencing practices: Comparing natural sciences and engineering with social sciences and humanities," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 57(8), pages 997-1004, June.
    9. Daniele Fanelli, 2013. "Redefine misconduct as distorted reporting," Nature, Nature, vol. 494(7436), pages 149-149, February.
    10. Ortega, José Luis, 2014. "Influence of co-authorship networks in the research impact: Ego network analyses from Microsoft Academic Search," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 728-737.
    11. Romina Rodela, 2016. "On the use of databases about research performance: comments on Karlovčec and Mladenić (2015) and others using the SICRIS database," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 2151-2157, December.
    12. Shibayama, Sotaro & Baba, Yasunori, 2015. "Impact-oriented science policies and scientific publication practices: The case of life sciences in Japan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 936-950.
    13. Heather Keathley-Herring & Eileen Van Aken & Fernando Gonzalez-Aleu & Fernando Deschamps & Geert Letens & Pablo Cardenas Orlandini, 2016. "Assessing the maturity of a research area: bibliometric review and proposed framework," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 927-951, November.
    14. Melin, Goran, 2000. "Pragmatism and self-organization: Research collaboration on the individual level," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 31-40, January.
    15. M. Pelacho & G. Ruiz & F. Sanz & A. Tarancón & J. Clemente-Gallardo, 2021. "Analysis of the evolution and collaboration networks of citizen science scientific publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 225-257, January.
    16. Anuška Ferligoj & Luka Kronegger & Franc Mali & Tom A. B. Snijders & Patrick Doreian, 2015. "Scientific collaboration dynamics in a national scientific system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 985-1012, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Katarina Rojko & Brankica Bratić & Borut Lužar, 2020. "The Bologna reform’s impacts on the scientific publication performance of Ph.D. graduates—the case of Slovenia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 329-356, July.
    2. Rojko, Katarina & Lužar, Borut, 2022. "Scientific performance across research disciplines: Trends and differences in the case of Slovenia," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    3. Verleysen, Frederik T. & Engels, Tim C.E., 2014. "Barycenter representation of book publishing internationalization in the Social Sciences and Humanities," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 234-240.
    4. Roy Cerqueti & Claudio Lupi, 2023. "Severe testing of Benford’s law," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 32(2), pages 677-694, June.
    5. Andrej Kastrin & Jelena Klisara & Borut Lužar & Janez Povh, 2017. "Analysis of Slovenian research community through bibliographic networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(2), pages 791-813, February.
    6. Svein Kyvik & Ingvild Reymert, 2017. "Research collaboration in groups and networks: differences across academic fields," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(2), pages 951-967, November.
    7. Jane G. Payumo & Jamie Monson & Amy Jamison & Bradley W. Fenwick, 2019. "Metrics-based profiling of university research engagement with Africa: research management, gender, and internationalization perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(2), pages 675-698, November.
    8. Ali Gazni & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Fereshteh Didegah, 2012. "Mapping world scientific collaboration: Authors, institutions, and countries," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(2), pages 323-335, February.
    9. Călin Vâlsan & Andreea-Ionela Puiu & Elena Druică, 2024. "From Whence Commeth Data Misreporting? A Survey of Benford’s Law and Digit Analysis in the Time of the COVID-19 Pandemic," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-20, August.
    10. Ortega, José Luis, 2014. "Influence of co-authorship networks in the research impact: Ego network analyses from Microsoft Academic Search," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 728-737.
    11. Dinesh Pradhan & Partha Sarathi Paul & Umesh Maheswari & Subrata Nandi & Tanmoy Chakraborty, 2017. "$$C^3$$ C 3 -index: a PageRank based multi-faceted metric for authors’ performance measurement," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(1), pages 253-273, January.
    12. Hongyu Zhou & Raf Guns & Tim C. E. Engels, 2022. "Are social sciences becoming more interdisciplinary? Evidence from publications 1960–2014," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(9), pages 1201-1221, September.
    13. Miguel A. Ortiz Acuña & Adiel T. Almeida Filho & Francisco S. Ramos, 2024. "Modelling the triple helix system innovation of the main economies from Latin America: a coalitional game theory approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(6), pages 3245-3270, June.
    14. Chin-Chang Tsai & Elizabeth A. Corley & Barry Bozeman, 2016. "Collaboration experiences across scientific disciplines and cohorts," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(2), pages 505-529, August.
    15. Fan, Lingxu & Guo, Lei & Wang, Xinhua & Xu, Liancheng & Liu, Fangai, 2022. "Does the author’s collaboration mode lead to papers’ different citation impacts? An empirical analysis based on propensity score matching," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).
    16. Türker, İlker & Çavuşoğlu, Abdullah, 2016. "Detailing the co-authorship networks in degree coupling, edge weight and academic age perspective," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 386-392.
    17. Franc Mali & Toni Pustovrh & Rok Platinovšek & Luka Kronegger & Anuška Ferligoj, 2017. "The effects of funding and co-authorship on research performance in a small scientific community," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(4), pages 486-496.
    18. Daniele Fanelli & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2013. "Bibliometric Evidence for a Hierarchy of the Sciences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(6), pages 1-11, June.
    19. Susan Biancani & Daniel McFarland, 2013. "Social Networks Research in Higher Education," Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, National Research University Higher School of Economics, issue 4, pages 85-126.
    20. Jane Payumo & Taurean Sutton & Derek Brown & Dan Nordquist & Marc Evans & Danna Moore & Prema Arasu, 2017. "Input–output analysis of international research collaborations: a case study of five U.S. universities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1657-1671, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:15:y:2021:i:3:s1751157721000341. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/joi .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.