Article's Scientific Prestige: measuring the impact of individual articles in the Web of Science
Chen, Yinga b, Thorsten Kochc d, Nazgul Zakiyevad, Kailiang Liu, Zhitong Xue, Chun‐Houh Chenf, Junji Nakanog, Keisuke Hondah
- aDepartment of Mathematics , National University of Singapore , Block S17 , Level 4 , 2 Science Drive 2 , 117543 Singapore
- bRisk Management Institute , National University of Singapore , 21 Heng Mui Keng Terrace , 04-03 , 119613 Singapore
- cTechnische Universität Berlin , Chair of Software and Algorithms for Discrete Optimization , Straße des 17. Juni 135 , 10623 Berlin , Germany
- dZuse Institute Berlin , Applied Algorithmic Intelligence Methods Department , Takustraße 7 , 14195 Berlin , Germany
- eDepartment of Statistics and Data Science , National University of Singapore , Block S16 , Level 7 , 6 Science Drive 2 , 117546 Singapore
- fThe Institute of Statistical Science , Academia Sinica , 128 Academia Road , Section 2 , Nankang , 11529 Taipei , Taiwan
- gDepartment of Global Management , Chuo University , 742-1 Higashinakano , Hachioji , 192-0393 Tokyo , Japan
- hInstitute of Statistical Mathematics , 10-3 Midorichō , Tachikawa , 190-0014 Tokyo , Japan
Papers open inside SciRah from the original publisher or repository; SciRah never hosts them.
Abstract
We performed a citation analysis on the Web of Science publications consisting of more than 63 million articles and 1.45 billion citations on 254 subjects from 1981 to 2020. We proposed the Article's Scientific Prestige (ASP) metric and compared this metric to number of citations (#Cit) and journal grade in measuring the scientific impact of individual articles in the large-scale hierarchical and multi-disciplined citation network. In contrast to #Cit, ASP, that is computed based on the eigenvector centrality, considers both direct and indirect citations, and provides steady-state evaluation cross different disciplines. We found that ASP and #Cit are not aligned for most articles, with a growing mismatch amongst the less cited articles. While both metrics are reliable for evaluating the prestige of articles such as Nobel Prize winning articles, ASP tends to provide more persuasive rankings than #Cit when the articles are not highly cited. The journal grade, that is eventually determined by a few highly cited articles, is unable to properly reflect the scientific impact of individual articles. The number of references and coauthors are less relevant to scientific impact, but subjects do make a difference.
TL;DRThis work proposed the Article's Scientific Prestige (ASP) metric and compared this metric to number of citations (#Cit) and journal grade in measuring the scientific impact of individual articles in the large-scale hierarchical and multi-disciplined citation network. (Semantic Scholar)