Counting and comparing publication output with and without equalizing and inflationary bias

Nils T. Hagen

Journal of Informetrics, 2014, vol. 8, issue 2, 310-317

Abstract: This paper examines the effects of inflationary and equalizing bias on publication output rankings. Any identifiable amount of bias in authorship accreditation was detrimental to accuracy when ranking a select group of leading Canadian aquaculture researchers. Bias arose when publication scores were calculated without taking into account information about multiple authorship and differential coauthor contributions. The ensuing biased equal credit scores, whether fractional or inflated, produced rankings that were fundamentally different from the ranking of harmonic estimates of actual credit calculated by using all relevant byline information in the source data. In conclusion, the results indicate that both fractional and inflated rankings are misleading, and suggest that accurate accreditation of coauthors is the key to reliable publication performance rankings.

Keywords: Publication performance ranking; Coauthor credit; Harmonic formula; Bibliometric bias; Equalizing bias; Inflationary bias (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2014
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (11)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157714000042
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:infome:v:8:y:2014:i:2:p:310-317

DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2014.01.003

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Informetrics is currently edited by Leo Egghe

More articles in Journal of Informetrics from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().