7.1.4References


Bookstein, A. (1997). Informetric Distributions. III. Ambiguity and Randomness. JASIS, 48(1), 2-10.

Chi, P.-S., Glänzel, W. (2018). Comparison of citation and usage indicators in research assess-ment in scientific disciplines and journals. Scientometrics 116(1), 537-554.

Chi, P.-S., Glänzel, W. (2019).  Citation and usage indicators for monographic literature in the Book Citation Index in the social sciences. ISSI Newsletter, 14(4), in press80–86.

Costas, R., Zahedi, Z., Wouters, P. (2015). Do “Altmetrics” Correlate With Citations? Extensive Comparison of Altmetric Indicators With Citations From a Multidisciplinary Perspective. JASIST, 66(10), 2003–2019.

Glänzel, W., Debackere, K. (2003). On the opportunities and limitations in using bibliometric indicators in a policy relevant context. In: R. Ball (Ed.), Bibliometric Analysis in Science and Research: Applications, Benefits and Limitations, Jülich.

Glänzel, W. (2006). The 'perspective shift' in bibliometrics and its and its consequences. I. International Conference on Multidisciplinary Information Sciences and Technologies” (InScit2006), Mérida, Spain, 25–28 October 2006. Accessible at: http://de.slideshare.net/inscit2006/the-perspective-shift-in-bibliometrics-and-its-consequences

Glänzel, W., Chi, P.S. (2016), Scientometrics 2.0 – and beyond? Background, promises, challenges and limitations. ISSI Newsletter, 12(3), 33–36.

Glänzel, W., Chi, P.-S. (2019). Research beyond scholarly communication – The big challenge of scientometrics 2.0. In Proceedings of the ISSI Conference 2019, Rome, Italy.

Glänzel, W., Moed, H., Schmoch, U., Thelwall, M. (2019). Handbook of science and technology indicators. Springer.

Gorraiz,  J., Gumpenberger,  C., Schloegl,  C.  (2014). Usage  versus  citation  behaviours  in  four  subject areas. Scientometrics, 101(2), 1077-1095.Gumpenberger, Ch., Glänzel, W. & Gorraiz, J. (2016). The ecstasy and the agony of the altmetric score. Scientometrics, 108(2), 977-982.

Gumpenberger, Ch., Glänzel, W., Gorraiz, J. (2016). The ecstasy and the agony of the altmetric score. Scientometrics, 108(2), 977-982. DOI 10.1007/s11192-016-1991-5.

Hoffmann, Ch.P., Lutz, Ch., Meckel, M. (2014), Impact Factor 2.0: Applying Social Network Analysis to Scientific Impact Assessment. SSRN.

Kousha, K. (2019). Web citation indicators for wider impact assessment of articles. In: W. Glänzel, H. Moed, U. Schmoch, M. Thelwall (eds.) Handbook of science and technology indicators. Pp. 801-818. Springer.

Priem, J., Hemminger, B. H. (2010). Scientometrics 2.0: New metrics of scholarly impact on the social Web. First Monday. Doi:10.5210/fm.v15i7.2874.

Priem, J. (2014). Altmetrics. Beyond Bibliometrics: Harnessing multidimensional indicators of scholarly impact. In B. Cronin and C.R. Sugimoto (Eds.), Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Sugimoto, C. (2016), Unlocking social data for science indicators. (White paper), NSF Workshop on Bibliometric Indicators, Arlington.

Thelwall, M. (2017a). Are Mendeley reader counts high enough for research evaluations when articles are published? ASLIB Journal of Information Management, 69(2), 174-183.

Thelwall, M. (2017b). Are Mendeley reader counts useful impact indicators in all fields? Scien-tometrics, 113(3), 1721-1731.

Thelwall, M. (2018). Early Mendeley readers correlate with later citation counts. Scientometrics, 115(3), 1231-1240.

Van Noorden, R. (2014). Online collaboration: Scientists and the social network. Nature, 512, 126-129.

Wouters, P., Costas, R. (2012). Users, narcissism and control – tracking the impact of scholarly publications in the 21st century. SURF.

Wouters, P., Glänzel, W., Gläser, J., Rafols, I. (2013). The Dilemmas of Performance Indicators of Individual Researchers – An Urgent Debate in Bibliometrics. ISSI Newsletter, 9, 48–53.

Wouters, P., Zahedi, Z. & Costas, R. (2019). Social media metrics for new research evaluation. In: W. Glänzel, H. Moed, U. Schmoch, M. Thelwall (eds.) Handbook of science and technology indicators. Pp. 687-714. Springer.