Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorWhite, Howard D.
dc.contributor.authorBoell, Sebastian K.
dc.contributor.authorYu, Hairong
dc.contributor.authorDavis, Mari
dc.contributor.authorWilson, Concepción S.
dc.contributor.authorCole, Fletcher T. H.
dc.date.accessioned2009-06-22T00:00:01Z
dc.date.available2010-06-18T23:35:01Z
dc.date.issued2009-06en_US
dc.date.submitted2009-06-22en_US
dc.identifier.citationLibcitations: A Measure for Comparative Assessment of Book Publications in the Humanities and Social Sciences 2009-06, 60(6) Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technologyen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/105823
dc.description.abstractBibliometric measures for evaluating research units in the book-oriented humanities and social sciences are underdeveloped relative to those available for journal-oriented science and technology. We therefore present a new measure designed for book-oriented fields: the â libcitation count.â This is a count of the libraries holding a given book, as reported in a national or international union catalog. As librarians decide what to acquire for the audiences they serve, they jointly constitute an instrument for gauging the cultural impact of books. Their decisions are informed by knowledge not only of audiences but also of the book world, e.g., the reputations of authors and the prestige of publishers. From libcitation counts, measures can be derived for comparing research units. Here, we imagine a matchup between the departments of history, philosophy, and political science at the University of New South Wales and the University of Sydney in Australia. We chose the 12 books from each department that had thehighest libcitation counts in the Libraries Australia union catalog during 2000â 2006. We present each bookâ s raw libcitation count, its rank within its LC class, and its LC-class normalized libcitation score. The latter is patterned on the item-oriented field normalized citation score used in evaluative bibliometrics. Summary statistics based on these measures allow the departments to be compared for cultural impact. Our work has implications for programs such as Excellence in Research for Australia and the Research Assessment Exercise in the United Kingdom. It also has implications for data mining in OCLCâ s WorldCat.
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherH. W. Wilsonen_US
dc.subjectBibliometricsen_US
dc.subjectLibrariesen_US
dc.subjectInformetricsen_US
dc.subjectLibrary Statisticsen_US
dc.subject.otherLibcitationen_US
dc.subject.otherBibliometricsen_US
dc.subject.otherHumanitiesen_US
dc.subject.otherSocial sciencesen_US
dc.subject.otherAustraliaen_US
dc.subject.otherLibrary holdingsen_US
dc.subject.otherHoldingsen_US
dc.subject.otherLC-Classen_US
dc.subject.otherHistoryen_US
dc.subject.otherPhilosophyen_US
dc.subject.otherPolitical sciencesen_US
dc.titleLibcitations: A Measure for Comparative Assessment of Book Publications in the Humanities and Social Sciencesen_US
dc.typeJournal Article (On-line/Unpaginated)en_US
dc.identifier.journalJournal of the American Society for Information Science and Technologyen_US
refterms.dateFOA2018-08-21T14:47:17Z
html.description.abstractBibliometric measures for evaluating research units in the book-oriented humanities and social sciences are underdeveloped relative to those available for journal-oriented science and technology. We therefore present a new measure designed for book-oriented fields: the â libcitation count.â This is a count of the libraries holding a given book, as reported in a national or international union catalog. As librarians decide what to acquire for the audiences they serve, they jointly constitute an instrument for gauging the cultural impact of books. Their decisions are informed by knowledge not only of audiences but also of the book world, e.g., the reputations of authors and the prestige of publishers. From libcitation counts, measures can be derived for comparing research units. Here, we imagine a matchup between the departments of history, philosophy, and political science at the University of New South Wales and the University of Sydney in Australia. We chose the 12 books from each department that had thehighest libcitation counts in the Libraries Australia union catalog during 2000â 2006. We present each bookâ s raw libcitation count, its rank within its LC class, and its LC-class normalized libcitation score. The latter is patterned on the item-oriented field normalized citation score used in evaluative bibliometrics. Summary statistics based on these measures allow the departments to be compared for cultural impact. Our work has implications for programs such as Excellence in Research for Australia and the Research Assessment Exercise in the United Kingdom. It also has implications for data mining in OCLCâ s WorldCat.


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Libcitation-White,Boell,Yu,Dav ...
Size:
211.9Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record