IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v95y2013i1d10.1007_s11192-012-0793-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are American astrophysics papers accepted more quickly than others? Part II: correlations with citation rates, subdisciplines, and author numbers

Author

Listed:
  • Virginia Trimble

    (University of California
    Las Cumbres Observatory)

  • Jose A. Ceja

Abstract

We continue the investigation for more than 2,150 astrophysics papers published from July 2007 to June 2008 of various possible correlations among time from submission to acceptance; nationalities of lead authors; numbers of citations to the papers in three years after publication; subdisciplines; and numbers of authors. Paper I found that submissions from American authors were accepted faster than others but by only about 3.8 days out of a median of 105 days. Here we report the following additional relationships: (1) the correlation of citation rate with lag time is weak, the most cited papers having intermediate lag times, (2) citation rates are highest for papers with European and American authors and much smaller for papers from less-developed (etc.) countries, with other prosperous countries in between, (3) citation rates are much larger for currently hot topics (exoplanets, cosmology), than for less hot ones (binary stars, for instance), (4) papers with many authors (seven to more than 100) are more often cited than 1–2 author ones, but this is not linear, and author numbers are not much correlated with lag times, and (5) the lag time for hot topics is about the same as that for less hot topics, which surprised us. Of specific subfields, solar papers are, on average, accepted fastest, quite often within less than 2 months. We don’t know why.

Suggested Citation

  • Virginia Trimble & Jose A. Ceja, 2013. "Are American astrophysics papers accepted more quickly than others? Part II: correlations with citation rates, subdisciplines, and author numbers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(1), pages 45-54, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:95:y:2013:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0793-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0793-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-012-0793-7
    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/s11192-012-0793-7?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. Virgina Trimble & Jose A. Ceja, 2011. "Are American astrophysics papers accepted more quickly than others?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(1), pages 281-289, October.
    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. Michal Krawczyk & Ernesto Reuben, 2012. "(Un)Available upon Request: Field Experiment on Researchers' Willingness to Share Supplementary Materials," Natural Field Experiments 00689, The Field Experiments Website.
    2. Maciej J. Mrowinski & Agata Fronczak & Piotr Fronczak & Olgica Nedic & Marcel Ausloos, 2016. "Review time in peer review: quantitative analysis and modelling of editorial workflows," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(1), pages 271-286, April.

    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:95:y:2013:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0793-7. 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.