Vladimir M. Moskovkin, Sun XingyuanPublished in:
Scholarly Communication Review
– Volume 7, Number 1 (January-March 2017)



Keywords: citation, economist rankings, h-index, publication activity, RSCI, scientist rankings


Share:

Abstract:

The article presents the calculation of the scientists’ rankings based on standard indicators of Russian Science Citation Index (RSCI) without binding these indicators to the journal publication is erroneous, as in this case, it reveals an excessive number of citations of textbooks and monographs coming from the dissertations and their abstracts. This conclusion is drawn from calculations by E.V. Balatsky rating for 2016 which formalized a known criminal scheme of wrapping of the citation and h-index, which uses two different groups of journals, one of which publishes articles of the members of the conference organizing Committee, and secondly, is the journal used for the wrapping links of the members of the organizing Committee. The article presents also a comparative correlation-regression analysis of Russian economists’ rankings of E.V. Balatsky for 2015 and 2016., which showed a bad consistency, which indicates significant differences in their calculation methodologies.

Highlights:

• titled scientists at the top of the rankings are winning through a huge number of links to their monographs and textbooks, coming mainly from theses
• the tradition of preferential citation of a certain range of award-winning scientists comes from the Soviet era
• in Soviet times, there were no "Publish or Perish" races for a number of publications and h-index, but was the desire to publish good paper in domestic or foreign academic respectable journal
• 117 scientists and economists from the rating 2016 didn’t take part in the rating 2015, that shows the fundamental differences in both methodologies
• the calculation of the rankings of scientists based on standard RSCI indicators without tying these indicators to the journal publications is incorrect, as in this case, we find an unusually large number of citations of books and monographs from theses and their abstracts

---

References:
Arzamastsev, A.A. (2008). Ispol'zovaniye metodov matematicheskogo modelirovaniya i iskusstvennogo intellekta dlya otsenki deyatel'nosti nauchnykh rabotnikov [The use of methods of mathematical modeling and artificial intelligence to assess the activities of scientists]. Vestnik Tambovskogo universiteta. Seriya: Yestestvennyye i tekhnicheskiye nauki, 13(4). 301-312. (in Russian).
Balatskiy, Ye.V. (2015). Reytingovaniye uchastnikov rossiyskogo rynka ekonomicheskikh issledovaniy [Rating of participants of the Russian market of economic research]. Journal of Institutional Studies (Zhurnal institutsional'nykh issledovaniy), 7(3). 102-121. (in Russian).
Balatskiy, Ye.V. (2016). Nesbalansirovannost' naukometricheskikh RINTS-pokazateley rossiyskikh ekonomistov [The imbalance of science-metric RSCI indicators of Russian economists]. Journal of New Economic Association, (2). 176-180. (in Russian).
Bornmann, L. (2011). A multilevel meta-analysis of studies reporting correlations between the h index and 37 different h index variants. Journal of Informetrics, 5(3). 346-359.
Dezhina, I.G. (2008). Yest' li v Rossii vedushchiye ekonomisty i kto oni? [Are there any leading economists in Russia and who are they?]. Nauchnyye trudy Instituta ekonomiki perekhodnogo perioda. Moscow, IEPP. (in Russian).
Garfield, E. (1972). Citation Analysis as a tool in journal evaluation. Science, 178. 471-479.
Hirsch, J.E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(46). 16569–16572.
Kirvas, V.A. (2013). Nauchnometricheskaya otsenka rezul'tatov issledovaniy deyatel'nosti uchenykh i kachestva periodicheskikh nauchnykh izdaniy [Scientific-scientific evaluation of research results of scientists and the quality of periodical scientific publications]. Sistemi obrobki informatsii, (8). 5-15. (in Russian).
Marchant, T. (2009). Score-based bibliometric rankings of authors. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(6). 1132-1137.
Moskovkin, V.M. (2014). Construction IF-Scoring Rule Within the Framework of New Generation of Metric Citations. Research Journal of Applied Sciences,9(12). 1167-1170.
Moskovkin, V.M. (2015). Konstruirovaniye metrik tsitirovaniya novogo poko-leniya [Construction of new generation citation metrics]. Nauchno-tekhnicheskaya informatsiya. Ser. 2. Informatsionnyye protsessy i sistemy, (8). 30-36. (in Russian).
Reyting akademicheskoy aktivnosti i populyarnosti ekonomistov Rossii [Rating of academic activity and popularity of economists in Russia]. (2015). Neergodicheskaya ekonomika. url: http://nonerg-econ.ru/cat/18/7/ (in Russian).
Rostovtsev, A.A. (2015). Data-sotsiologiya i nekotoryye problemy nauchnoy attestatsii [Data-sociology and some problems of scientific attestation]. Nauka. Innovatsii. Obrazovaniye, (18). 244–254. (in Russian).
Shtennikov, V.N. (2015). Nauchnyye reytingi, ili sanktsii po-russki [Scientific Ratings, or Sanctions in Russian]. Birzha intellektual'noy sobstvennosti, 14(10). 20-22. (in Russian).
Shumilov, A.V. (2016). Akademicheskiye reytingi RelEc: voprosy postroyeniya i rol' rossiyskikh uchastnikov [Academic ratings of RelEc: construction issues and the role of Russian participants]. Munich Personal RePEc ArchivPaper, No.70956. url: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/70956/ (in Russian).
Waltman, L. (2012). The inconsistency of the h-index. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(2). 406–415.
Zolotoy reyting akademicheskoy aktivnosti i populyarnosti ekonomistov Rossii [Gold rating of academic activity and popularity of Russian economists] (2016). Neergodicheskaya ekonomika. url: http://nonerg-econ.ru/cat/9/57 (in Russian).