IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v89y2011i1d10.1007_s11192-011-0436-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The “Mendel syndrome” in science: durability of scientific literature and its effects on bibliometric analysis of individual scientists

Author

Listed:
  • Rodrigo Costas

    (Leiden University)

  • Thed N. Leeuwen

    (Leiden University)

  • Anthony F. J. Raan

    (Leiden University)

Abstract

The obsolescence and “durability” of scientific literature have been important elements of debate during many years, especially regarding the proper calculation of bibliometric indicators. The effects of “delayed recognition” on impact indicators have importance and are of interest not only to bibliometricians but also among research managers and scientists themselves. It has been suggested that the “Mendel syndrome” is a potential drawback when assessing individual researchers through impact measures. If publications from particular researchers need more time than “normal” to be properly acknowledged by their colleagues, the impact of these researchers may be underestimated with common citation windows. In this paper, we answer the question whether the bibliometric indicators for scientists can be significantly affected by the Mendel syndrome. Applying a methodology developed previously for the classification of papers according to their durability (Costas et al., J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 61(8):1564–1581, 2010a; J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 61(2):329–339, 2010b), the scientific production of 1,064 researchers working at the Spanish Council for Scientific Research (CSIC) in three different research areas has been analyzed. Cases of potential “Mendel syndrome” are rarely found among researchers and these cases do not significantly outperform the impact of researchers with a standard pattern of reception in their citations. The analysis of durability could be included as a parameter for the consideration of the citation windows used in the bibliometric analysis of individuals.

Suggested Citation

  • Rodrigo Costas & Thed N. Leeuwen & Anthony F. J. Raan, 2011. "The “Mendel syndrome” in science: durability of scientific literature and its effects on bibliometric analysis of individual scientists," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(1), pages 177-205, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:89:y:2011:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-011-0436-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-011-0436-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-011-0436-4
    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/s11192-011-0436-4?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. Thijs Pollman, 2000. "Forgetting and the Ageing of Scientific Publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 47(1), pages 43-54, January.
    2. Rodrigo Costas & María Bordons, 2005. "Bibliometric indicators at the micro-level: some results in the area of natural resources at the Spanish CSIC," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 14(2), pages 110-120, August.
    3. Rodrigo Costas & Thed N. van Leeuwen & María Bordons, 2010. "A bibliometric classificatory approach for the study and assessment of research performance at the individual level: The effects of age on productivity and impact," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(8), pages 1564-1581, August.
    4. Rodrigo Costas & Thed N. van Leeuwen & Anthony F.J. van Raan, 2010. "Is scientific literature subject to a ‘Sell-By-Date’? A general methodology to analyze the ‘durability’ of scientific documents," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(2), pages 329-339, February.
    5. Wolfgang Glänzel & Balázs Schlemmer & Bart Thijs, 2003. "Better late than never? On the chance to become highly cited only beyond the standard bibliometric time horizon," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(3), pages 571-586, November.
    6. Anthony F. J. van Raan, 2004. "Sleeping Beauties in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 59(3), pages 467-472, March.
    7. Clive Beed & Cara Beed, 1996. "Measuring the Quality of Academic Journals: The Case of Economics," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(3), pages 369-396, March.
    8. Juan Miguel Campanario & Erika Acedo, 2007. "Rejecting highly cited papers: The views of scientists who encounter resistance to their discoveries from other scientists," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 58(5), pages 734-743, March.
    9. Katherine W. McCain, 2011. "Eponymy and Obliteration by Incorporation: The case of the “Nash Equilibrium”," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(7), pages 1412-1424, July.
    10. C. B. Amat & A. Yegros Yegros, 2009. "Median age difference of references as indicator of information update of research groups: A case study in Spanish food research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 78(3), pages 447-465, March.
    11. Bornmann, Lutz & Daniel, Hans-Dieter, 2010. "Citation speed as a measure to predict the attention an article receives: An investigation of the validity of editorial decisions at Angewandte Chemie International Edition," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(1), pages 83-88.
    12. M Bordons & M A Zulueta & A Cabrero & S Barrigón, 1995. "Research performance at the micro level: analysis of structure and dynamics of pharmacological research teams," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(2), pages 137-142, August.
    13. Elliot Noma & Dominic Olivastro, 1985. "Are there enduring patents?," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 36(5), pages 297-301, September.
    14. Hendrik P. van Dalen & K?ne Henkens, 2005. "Signals in science - On the importance of signaling in gaining attention in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 64(2), pages 209-233, August.
    15. Dag W Aksnes & Randi Elisabeth Taxt, 2004. "Peer reviews and bibliometric indicators: a comparative study at a Norwegian university," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(1), pages 33-41, April.
    16. Hendrik P. van Dalen & Kène Henkens, 2004. "Demographers and Their Journals: Who Remains Uncited After Ten Years?," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 30(3), pages 489-506, September.
    17. Peter Weingart, 2005. "Impact of bibliometrics upon the science system: Inadvertent consequences?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 62(1), pages 117-131, January.
    18. Dag W Aksnes, 2003. "Characteristics of highly cited papers," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(3), pages 159-170, 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. Elena M. Tur & Evangelos Bourelos & Maureen McKelvey, 2022. "The case of sleeping beauties in nanotechnology: a study of potential breakthrough inventions in emerging technologies," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 69(3), pages 683-708, December.
    2. Miura, Takahiro & Asatani, Kimitaka & Sakata, Ichiro, 2023. "Revisiting the uniformity and inconsistency of slow-cited papers in science," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1).
    3. Lorna Wildgaard & Jesper W. Schneider & Birger Larsen, 2014. "A review of the characteristics of 108 author-level bibliometric indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 125-158, October.
    4. Jian Wang, 2013. "Citation time window choice for research impact evaluation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 851-872, March.
    5. Adil El Aichouchi & Philippe Gorry, 2018. "Delayed recognition of Judah Folkman’s hypothesis on tumor angiogenesis: when a Prince awakens a Sleeping Beauty by self-citation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 385-399, July.
    6. Mund, Carolin & Neuhäusler, Peter, 2015. "Towards an early-stage identification of emerging topics in science—The usability of bibliometric characteristics," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 1018-1033.

    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. Thomas Heinze, 2013. "Creative accomplishments in science: definition, theoretical considerations, examples from science history, and bibliometric findings," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(3), pages 927-940, June.
    2. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    3. Costas, Rodrigo & van Leeuwen, Thed N. & van Raan, Anthony F.J., 2013. "Effects of the durability of scientific literature at the group level: Case study of chemistry research groups in the Netherlands," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 886-894.
    4. Li, Jiang & Shi, Dongbo & Zhao, Star X. & Ye, Fred Y., 2014. "A study of the “heartbeat spectra” for “sleeping beauties”," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 493-502.
    5. Onodera, Natsuo, 2016. "Properties of an index of citation durability of an article," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 981-1004.
    6. Jiang Li, 2014. "Citation curves of “all-elements-sleeping-beauties”: “flash in the pan” first and then “delayed recognition”," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 100(2), pages 595-601, August.
    7. You Song & Fangling Situ & Hongjun Zhu & Jinzhi Lei, 2018. "To be the Prince to wake up Sleeping Beauty: the rediscovery of the delayed recognition studies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 9-24, October.
    8. Jianhua Hou & Xiucai Yang, 2019. "Patent sleeping beauties: evolutionary trajectories and identification methods," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(1), pages 187-215, July.
    9. Colavizza, Giovanni & Franceschet, Massimo, 2016. "Clustering citation histories in the Physical Review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 1037-1051.
    10. Abramo, Giovanni & Cicero, Tindaro & D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea, 2011. "Assessing the varying level of impact measurement accuracy as a function of the citation window length," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 659-667.
    11. Lachance, Christian & Larivière, Vincent, 2014. "On the citation lifecycle of papers with delayed recognition," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 863-872.
    12. Hou, Jianhua & Yang, Xiucai, 2020. "Social media-based sleeping beauties: Defining, identifying and features," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2).
    13. Jonathan M. Levitt & Mike Thelwall, 2009. "The most highly cited Library and Information Science articles: Interdisciplinarity, first authors and citation patterns," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 78(1), pages 45-67, January.
    14. Jonathan M. Levitt & Mike Thelwall, 2008. "Patterns of annual citation of highly cited articles and the prediction of their citation ranking: A comparison across subjects," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 77(1), pages 41-60, October.
    15. Jian Wang, 2013. "Citation time window choice for research impact evaluation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 851-872, March.
    16. András Schubert & Wolfgang Glänzel & Gábor Schubert, 2022. "Eponyms in science: famed or framed?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(3), pages 1199-1207, March.
    17. Jianhua Hou & Xiucai Yang & Yang Zhang, 2023. "The effect of social media knowledge cascade: an analysis of scientific papers diffusion," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(9), pages 5169-5195, September.
    18. Hui Fang, 2019. "A transition stage co-citation criterion for identifying the awakeners of sleeping beauty publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 307-322, October.
    19. Rodrigo Costas & Thed N. Leeuwen & María Bordons, 2012. "Referencing patterns of individual researchers: Do top scientists rely on more extensive information sources?," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(12), pages 2433-2450, December.
    20. Aksnes, Dag W. & Rip, Arie, 2009. "Researchers' perceptions of citations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 895-905, July.

    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:89:y:2011:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-011-0436-4. 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.