* Relationship of the disruption indicator with other bibliometric indicator
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3145/infonomy.24.016Keywords:
Scientometrics, Bibliometric indicators, Disruption indices, Scientific impact, Excellence, Technological impactAbstract
An indicator to measure disruption has recently been proposed (Funk & Owen-Smith, 2017; Wu, Wang, & Evans, 2019) which has given rise to a large number of variants (Bornmann et al., 2020). In this work we are going to focus on the original indicator DI and the one that seems to have a better performance DI5 (Bornmann and Tekles, 2021; Bittmann et al., 2021) carrying out a large-scale study comparing the scores assigned to each paper with other bibliometric indicators. The result is that the papers to which the bibliometric indicators assign more value do not obtain better scores. Reviews and short surveys have higher scores than articles and conference papers. Excellent papers have worse scores than non-excellent ones. Works with international collaboration obtain worse values than those without it. Works published in Q1 journals have worse scores than those published in journals of other quartiles. And there is also a small negative correlation with the normalized impact and with the technological impact.References
Arthur, W. B. (2007). The structure of invention. Research policy, 36(2), 274-287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2006.11.005
Bittmann, F.; Tekles, A.; Bornmann, L. (2021). Applied usage and performance of statistical matching in bibliometrics: The comparison of milestone and regular papers with multiple measurements of disruptiveness as an empirical example. Quantitative Science Studies, 2(4), 1246-1270. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00158
Bornmann, L.; Devarakonda, S.; Tekles, A.; Chacko, G. (2019). Disruptive papers published in Scientometrics: meaningful results by using an improved variant of the disruption index originally proposed by Wu, Wang, and Evans (2019). Scientometrics, 123, 1149–1155 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03406-8
Bornmann, L.; Devarakonda, S.; Tekles, A.; Chacko, G. (2020). Are disruption index indicators convergently valid? The comparison of several indicator variants with assessments by peers. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(3), 1242-1259. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00068
Bornmann, Lutz; Moya-Anegón, Félix; Leydesdorff, Loet (2012). “The new excellence indicator in the World Report of the SCImago Institutions Rankings 2011”. Journal of Informetrics, vol. 6, n. 2, pp. 333–335. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2011.11.006
Bornmann, L.; Tekles, A. (2019a). Disruptive papers published in Scientometrics. Scientometrics, 120, 331–336. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03113-z
Bornmann, L.; Tekles, A. (2019b). Disruption index depends on length of citation window. Profesional de la información, 28(2). https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2019.mar.07
Bornmann, L.; Tekles, A. (2021). Convergent validity of several indicators measuring disruptiveness with milestone assignments to physics papers by experts. Journal of Informetrics, 15(3), 101159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2021.101159
Funk, R. J.; Owen-Smith, J. (2017). A dynamic network measure of technological change. Management science, 63(3), 791-817. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2015.2366
Guerrero-Bote, V. P.; Moed, H. F.; Moya-Anegon, F. (2021). New indicators of the technological impact of scientific production. Journal of Data and Information Science, 6(4), 36–61. https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2021-0028
Leydesdorff, L.; Tekles, A.; Bornmann, L. (2021). A proposal to revise the disruption indicator. Profesional de la información, 30(1). https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2021.ene.21
Park, M.; Leahey, E.; Funk, R. J. (2023). Papers and patents are becoming less disruptive over time. Nature, 613(7942), 138-144. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05543-x
Rehn, Catharina; Kronman, Ulf (2008). Bibliometric handbook for Karolinska Institutet. Karolinska Institutet University Library. Version 1.05. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.1480.9447
Schumpeter, J. A. (2011). Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy.
Tushman, M. L.; Anderson, P. (1986). Technological discontinuities and organizational environments. Administrative science quarterly, 31, 439-465. PART III. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392832
Wu, L.; Wang, D.; Evans, J. A. (2019). Large teams develop and small teams disrupt science and technology. Nature, 566(7744), 378-382. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-0941-9
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Downloads
Dimensions
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Vicente P. Guerrero-Bote, Félix De-Moya-Anegón
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
