IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nea/journl/y2016i30p176-180.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Misalignment of Russian Economists' Scientometric Indicators in RISC

Author

Listed:
  • Balatsky, E.

    (Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia
    Central Economics and Mathematics Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia)

  • Yurevich, M.

    (Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia
    Institute of Economics, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia)

Abstract

The article is focused on the problem of noncompliance between the key scientometric indicators of Russian economists in the electronic database of the Russian Science Citation Index (RSCI). It is shown that the number of publications, number of citations and h-index don't have are not related to each other statistically, which undermines the whole system of the individual contribution assessment in science. Such a situation leads to the appearance of pseudo-leaders between economists, which enjoy undeserved prestige. In addition, the syndrome of systematic data manipulation arises; it destroys academic ethics and distorts traditional academic values. This effect is specific to RSCI, because in Western databases of scientific information there is a strong relationship between aforementioned scientometric indicators. It is still difficult to find filtration procedures for bibliometric parameters, thus it is necessary to use labor-consuming manual methods of data processing.

Suggested Citation

  • Balatsky, E. & Yurevich, M., 2016. "The Misalignment of Russian Economists' Scientometric Indicators in RISC," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 176-180.
    • Handle: RePEc:nea:journl:y:2016:i:30:p:176-180
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econorus.org/repec/journl/2016-30-176-180r.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gangan Prathap, 2010. "The 100 most prolific economists using the p-index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(1), pages 167-172, July.
    2. Keshra Sangwal, 2012. "On the relationship between citations of publication output and Hirsch index h of authors: conceptualization of tapered Hirsch index h T, circular citation area radius R and citation acceleration a," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 987-1004, December.
    3. Leo Egghe, 2006. "Theory and practise of the g-index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 69(1), pages 131-152, October.
    4. Seiler, Christian & Wohlrabe, Klaus, 2012. "Ranking economists on the basis of many indicators: An alternative approach using RePEc data," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 389-402.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rubinstein, Alexander & Slutskin, Lev, 2018. "«Multiway data analysis» and the general problem of journals’ ranking," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 50, pages 90-113.

    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. Deming Lin & Tianhui Gong & Wenbin Liu & Martin Meyer, 2020. "An entropy-based measure for the evolution of h index research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2283-2298, December.
    2. R. Karpagam & S. Gopalakrishnan & M. Natarajan & B. Ramesh Babu, 2011. "Mapping of nanoscience and nanotechnology research in India: a scientometric analysis, 1990–2009," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(2), pages 501-522, November.
    3. Salih Selek & Ayman Saleh, 2014. "Use of h index and g index for American academic psychiatry," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(2), pages 541-548, May.
    4. Domingo Docampo & Jean-Jacques Bessoule, 2019. "A new approach to the analysis and evaluation of the research output of countries and institutions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 1207-1225, May.
    5. Vivek Kumar Singh & Sumit Kumar Banshal & Khushboo Singhal & Ashraf Uddin, 2015. "Scientometric mapping of research on ‘Big Data’," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(2), pages 727-741, November.
    6. Wohlrabe, Klaus, 2016. "Taking the Temperature: A Meta-Ranking of Economics Journals," MPRA Paper 68933, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Wei, Shelia X. & Tong, Tong & Rousseau, Ronald & Wang, Wanru & Ye, Fred Y., 2022. "Relations among the h-, g-, ψ-, and p-index and offset-ability," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).
    8. R. S. Bajwa & K. Yaldram, 2013. "Bibliometric analysis of biotechnology research in Pakistan," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 529-540, May.
    9. Rubinstein, Alexander & Slutskin, Lev, 2018. "«Multiway data analysis» and the general problem of journals’ ranking," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 50, pages 90-113.
    10. Abdulrahman A. Alshdadi & Muhammad Usman & Madini O. Alassafi & Muhammad Tanvir Afzal & Rayed AlGhamdi, 2023. "Formulation of rules for the scientific community using deep learning," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(3), pages 1825-1852, March.
    11. Lutz Bornmann & Alexander Butz & Klaus Wohlrabe, 2018. "What are the top five journals in economics? A new meta-ranking," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(6), pages 659-675, February.
    12. Asma Hammami & Nabil Semmar, 2022. "The simplex simulation as a tool to reveal publication strategies and citation factors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(1), pages 319-350, January.
    13. R. S. Bajwa & K. Yaldram & S. Rafique, 2013. "A scientometric assessment of research output in nanoscience and nanotechnology: Pakistan perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 333-342, January.
    14. Hausken, Kjell, 2016. "The Ranking of Researchers by Publications and Citations," UiS Working Papers in Economics and Finance 2016/11, University of Stavanger.
    15. Vîiu, Gabriel-Alexandru, 2016. "A theoretical evaluation of Hirsch-type bibliometric indicators confronted with extreme self-citation," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 552-566.
    16. Klaus Wohlrabe, 2018. "Einige Anmerkungen zum FAZ-Ökonomenranking 2018," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 71(20), pages 29-33, October.
    17. Aurelia Magdalena Pisoschi & Claudia Gabriela Pisoschi, 2016. "Is open access the solution to increase the impact of scientific journals?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 1075-1095, November.
    18. Katharina Rath & Klaus Wohlrabe, 2016. "Recent trends in co-authorship in economics: evidence from RePEc," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(12), pages 897-902, August.
    19. Gaviria-Marin, Magaly & Merigó, José M. & Baier-Fuentes, Hugo, 2019. "Knowledge management: A global examination based on bibliometric analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 194-220.
    20. Kaur, Jasleen & Radicchi, Filippo & Menczer, Filippo, 2013. "Universality of scholarly impact metrics," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 924-932.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    scientometrics; h-index; economist ranking; g-index; RSCI;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • B23 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought since 1925 - - - Econometrics; Quantitative and Mathematical Studies
    • B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:nea:journl:y:2016:i:30:p:176-180. 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: Alexey Tcharykov (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nearuea.html .

    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.