IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v86y2011i1d10.1007_s11192-010-0228-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A CERIF data model extension for evaluation and quantitative expression of scientific research results

Author

Listed:
  • Dragan Ivanović

    (University of Novi Sad)

  • Dušan Surla

    (University of Novi Sad)

  • Miloš Racković

    (University of Novi Sad)

Abstract

This paper presents a proposal of CERIF data model extension for evaluation of scientific research results. The data model extension is based on the CERIF semantic layer which enables classification of entities and relations between entities according to some classification scheme. The proposed data model was created using PowerDesigner CASE tool. The model is represented using a physical data model in the conceptual notation that is adopted in literature for representing the CERIF data model. This model is verified using the rule book for evaluation and quantitative expression of scientific research results of researchers employed at University of Novi Sad.

Suggested Citation

  • Dragan Ivanović & Dušan Surla & Miloš Racković, 2011. "A CERIF data model extension for evaluation and quantitative expression of scientific research results," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(1), pages 155-172, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:86:y:2011:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-010-0228-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-010-0228-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-010-0228-2
    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/s11192-010-0228-2?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. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    2. Hao Qiu & Yi-Feng Chen, 2009. "Bibliometric analysis of biological invasions research during the period of 1991 to 2007," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(3), pages 601-610, December.
    3. Benoît Godin, 2006. "On the origins of bibliometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 68(1), pages 109-133, July.
    4. András Schubert, 2002. "The Web of Scientometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 53(1), pages 3-20, January.
    5. William W. Hood & Concepción S. Wilson, 2001. "The Literature of Bibliometrics, Scientometrics, and Informetrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 52(2), pages 291-314, October.
    6. Mohohlo Molatudi & Neo Molotja & Anastassios Pouris, 2009. "A bibliometric study of bioinformatics research in South Africa," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(1), pages 47-59, October.
    7. Chan-Goo Yi & Keun-Bok Kang, 2000. "Developments of the evaluation system of government-supported research institutes in Korean science and technology," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(3), pages 158-170, December.
    8. Antje Klitkou & Magnus Gulbrandsen, 2010. "The relationship between academic patenting and scientific publishing in Norway," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(1), pages 93-108, January.
    9. Peter Weingart, 2005. "Impact of bibliometrics upon the science system: Inadvertent consequences?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 62(1), pages 117-131, January.
    10. Wolfgang Glänzel & András Schubert, 2003. "A new classification scheme of science fields and subfields designed for scientometric evaluation purposes," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 56(3), pages 357-367, March.
    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. Otmane Azeroual & Joachim Schöpfel & Dragan Ivanovic, 2020. "Influence of Information Quality via Implemented German RCD Standard in Research Information Systems," Data, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-10, March.
    2. Miloš Savić & Mirjana Ivanović & Bojana Dimić Surla, 2017. "Analysis of intra-institutional research collaboration: a case of a Serbian faculty of sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(1), pages 195-216, January.

    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. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    2. Alberto Martín-Martín & Enrique Orduna-Malea & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2018. "A novel method for depicting academic disciplines through Google Scholar Citations: The case of Bibliometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 1251-1273, March.
    3. Gregorio González-Alcaide, 2021. "Bibliometric studies outside the information science and library science field: uncontainable or uncontrollable?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(8), pages 6837-6870, August.
    4. Ying Guo & Xiantao Xiao, 2022. "Author-level altmetrics for the evaluation of Chinese scholars," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(2), pages 973-990, February.
    5. Juan Miguel Campanario, 2018. "Are leaders really leading? Journals that are first in Web of Science subject categories in the context of their groups," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 111-130, April.
    6. Hürlimann, Werner, 2015. "On the uniform random upper bound family of first significant digit distributions," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 349-358.
    7. Wang, Qiang & Li, Rongrong & He, Gang, 2018. "Research status of nuclear power: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 90-96.
    8. Luis Miguel Pérez & Raul Oltra-Badenes & Juan Vicente Oltra Gutiérrez & Hermenegildo Gil-Gómez, 2020. "A Bibliometric Diagnosis and Analysis about Smart Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-43, August.
    9. Guillaume Cabanac, 2012. "Shaping the landscape of research in information systems from the perspective of editorial boards: A scientometric study of 77 leading journals," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(5), pages 977-996, May.
    10. Guillaume Cabanac, 2012. "Shaping the landscape of research in information systems from the perspective of editorial boards: A scientometric study of 77 leading journals," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(5), pages 977-996, May.
    11. Staša Milojević & Loet Leydesdorff, 2013. "Information metrics (iMetrics): a research specialty with a socio-cognitive identity?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(1), pages 141-157, April.
    12. Konstantin Fursov & Yana Roschina & Oksana Balmush, 2016. "Determinants of Research Productivity: An Individual-level Lens," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 10(2), pages 44-56.
    13. Neus Herranz & Javier Ruiz-Castillo, 2013. "The end of the “European Paradox”," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(1), pages 453-464, April.
    14. repec:cte:werepe:11672 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Zhu, Wanying & Jin, Ching & Ma, Yifang & Xu, Cong, 2023. "Earlier recognition of scientific excellence enhances future achievements and promotes persistence," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2).
    16. Ole Ellegaard & Johan A. Wallin, 2015. "The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 1809-1831, December.
    17. Andreas Thor & Lutz Bornmann & Werner Marx & Rüdiger Mutz, 2018. "Identifying single influential publications in a research field: new analysis opportunities of the CRExplorer," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 591-608, July.
    18. Rousseau, Ronald & Hu, Xiaojun, 2013. "Two time series, their meaning and some applications," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 603-610.
    19. Waltman, Ludo, 2016. "A review of the literature on citation impact indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 365-391.
    20. Jianhua Hou & Xiucai Yang & Chaomei Chen, 2018. "Emerging trends and new developments in information science: a document co-citation analysis (2009–2016)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(2), pages 869-892, May.
    21. Gössling, Stefan & Moyle, Brent D. & Weaver, David, 2021. "Academic entrepreneurship: A bibliometric engagement model," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).

    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:86:y:2011:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-010-0228-2. 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.