IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v104y2015i2d10.1007_s11192-015-1615-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The effects of measurement error in case of scientific network analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Nuša Erman

    (University of Ljubljana)

  • Ljupčo Todorovski

    (University of Ljubljana)

Abstract

Scientific network analysis takes at input large amounts of bibliographical data that are often incomplete. This leads to the introduction of different measurement errors in the scientific networks, which, in turn, influence the results of scientific networks analyses. Different authors have been studying the effects of measurement error on the results of network analysis, but these studies mostly rely on data gathered by survey questionnaires or on the study of incomplete data that are shown as random processes and emerge in unweighted undirected networks. This article aims at overcoming the limitations of these studies in three directions. First, we introduce measurement errors to network data following three most frequently present and well-known problems often present in bibliographic data: multiple authorship, homographs, and synonyms. Second, we apply missing data mechanisms to the identified incomplete data sources in order to link the latter with the probability of their occurrence. Third, we apply the incomplete data sources to different types of scientific networks and study the effects of measurement error in both, the weighted directed (i.e., citation) network and the weighted undirected (i.e., co-authorship) network. The results show that the most destructive incomplete data source is the problem of synonyms; it influences the accuracy and the robustness of the network structural measures the most. On the other hand, the multiple-authorship problem does not influence the results of network analysis at all.

Suggested Citation

  • Nuša Erman & Ljupčo Todorovski, 2015. "The effects of measurement error in case of scientific network analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(2), pages 453-473, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:104:y:2015:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-015-1615-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-015-1615-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-015-1615-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-015-1615-5?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. T. J. Phelan, 1999. "A compendium of issues for citation analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 45(1), pages 117-136, May.
    2. Aaron Clauset & Cristopher Moore & M. E. J. Newman, 2008. "Hierarchical structure and the prediction of missing links in networks," Nature, Nature, vol. 453(7191), pages 98-101, May.
    3. Leo Egghe & Ronald Rousseau & Guido Van Hooydonk, 2000. "Methods for accrediting publications to authors or countries: Consequences for evaluation studies," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 51(2), pages 145-157.
    4. Michael H. MacRoberts & Barbara R. MacRoberts, 1989. "Problems of citation analysis: A critical review," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 40(5), pages 342-349, September.
    5. Alan L. Porter & Ismael Rafols, 2009. "Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(3), pages 719-745, December.
    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. Teemu Makkonen & Timo Mitze, 2016. "Scientific collaboration between ‘old’ and ‘new’ member states: Did joining the European Union make a difference?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(3), pages 1193-1215, March.
    2. Jinseok Kim, 2018. "Evaluating author name disambiguation for digital libraries: a case of DBLP," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1867-1886, September.
    3. Rodica Ioana Lung & Noémi Gaskó & Mihai Alexandru Suciu, 2018. "A hypergraph model for representing scientific output," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(3), pages 1361-1379, December.
    4. Antonio Zinilli, 2021. "Imputation methods for estimating public R&D funding: evidence from longitudinal data," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 55(2), pages 707-729, April.
    5. Michael Quayle & Maura Adshead, 2018. "The resilience of regional African HIV/AIDS research networks to the withdrawal of international authors in the subfield of public administration and governance: lessons for funders and collaborators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 163-173, October.
    6. Jan Schulz, 2016. "Using Monte Carlo simulations to assess the impact of author name disambiguation quality on different bibliometric analyses," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(3), pages 1283-1298, June.

    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. Lina Xu & Steven Dellaportas & Jin Wang, 2022. "A study of interdisciplinary accounting research: analysing the diversity of cited references," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(2), pages 2131-2162, June.
    2. Lina Xu & Steven Dellaportas & Zhiqiang Yang & Jin Wang, 2023. "More on the relationship between interdisciplinary accounting research and citation impact," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(4), pages 4779-4803, December.
    3. Fei Shu & Jesse David Dinneen & Shiji Chen, 2022. "Measuring the disparity among scientific disciplines using Library of Congress Subject Headings," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(6), pages 3613-3628, June.
    4. James H. Fowler & Dag W. Aksnes, 2007. "Does self-citation pay?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 72(3), pages 427-437, September.
    5. Dag W. Aksnes, 2003. "A macro study of self-citation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 56(2), pages 235-246, February.
    6. John Panaretos & Chrisovaladis Malesios, 2009. "Assessing scientific research performance and impact with single indices," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(3), pages 635-670, December.
    7. Li Tang & John P. Walsh, 2010. "Bibliometric fingerprints: name disambiguation based on approximate structure equivalence of cognitive maps," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(3), pages 763-784, September.
    8. Liyue Chen & Jielan Ding & Vincent Larivière, 2022. "Measuring the citation context of national self‐references," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(5), pages 671-686, May.
    9. Isola Ajiferuke & Dietmar Wolfram, 2010. "Citer analysis as a measure of research impact: library and information science as a case study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 83(3), pages 623-638, June.
    10. Jian Xu & Yi Bu & Ying Ding & Sinan Yang & Hongli Zhang & Chen Yu & Lin Sun, 2018. "Understanding the formation of interdisciplinary research from the perspective of keyword evolution: a case study on joint attention," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(2), pages 973-995, November.
    11. Diego Chavarro & Puay Tang & Ismael Rafols, 2014. "Interdisciplinarity and research on local issues: evidence from a developing country," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(3), pages 195-209.
    12. Su, Hsin-Ning & Moaniba, Igam M., 2017. "Investigating the dynamics of interdisciplinary evolution in technology developments," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 12-23.
    13. Dangzhi Zhao & Elisabeth Logan, 2002. "Citation analysis using scientific publications on the Web as data source: A case study in the XML research area," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 54(3), pages 449-472, July.
    14. Andreas Bjurström & Merritt Polk, 2011. "Climate change and interdisciplinarity: a co-citation analysis of IPCC Third Assessment Report," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 525-550, June.
    15. Seongkyoon Jeong & Jong-Chan Kim & Jae Young Choi, 2015. "Technology convergence: What developmental stage are we in?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 841-871, September.
    16. Shu-Chun Kuo & Tsair-Wei Chien & Willy Chou, 2022. "Suggestions to the article: medical professionalism research characteristics and hotspots," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(2), pages 1191-1194, February.
    17. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo & Flavia Costa, 2012. "Identifying interdisciplinarity through the disciplinary classification of coauthors of scientific publications," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(11), pages 2206-2222, November.
    18. Zuo, Zhiya & Zhao, Kang, 2018. "The more multidisciplinary the better? – The prevalence and interdisciplinarity of research collaborations in multidisciplinary institutions," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 736-756.
    19. Rafols, Ismael & Leydesdorff, Loet & O’Hare, Alice & Nightingale, Paul & Stirling, Andy, 2012. "How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1262-1282.
    20. Ding, Ying, 2011. "Community detection: Topological vs. topical," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 498-514.

    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:spr:scient:v:104:y:2015:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-015-1615-5. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.