| Title |
Generating clustered journal maps: an automated system for hierarchical classification
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientometrics, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11192-016-2226-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Loet Leydesdorff, Lutz Bornmann, Caroline S. Wagner |
| Abstract |
Journal maps and classifications for 11,359 journals listed in the combined Journal Citation Reports 2015 of the Science and Social Sciences Citation Indexes are provided at https://leydesdorff.github.io/journals/ and http://www.leydesdorff.net/jcr15. A routine using VOSviewer for integrating the journal mapping and their hierarchical clusterings is also made available. In this short communication, we provide background on the journal mapping/clustering and an explanation about and instructions for the routine. We compare journal maps for 2015 with those for 2014 and show the delineations among fields and subfields to be sensitive to fluctuations. Labels for fields and sub-fields are not provided by the routine, but an analyst can add them for pragmatic or intellectual reasons. The routine provides a means of testing one's assumptions against a baseline without claiming authority; clusters of related journals can be visualized to understand communities. The routine is generic and can be used for any 1-mode network. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Russia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 89 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 23% |
| Researcher | 14 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 9% |
| Professor | 8 | 9% |
| Other | 17 | 19% |
| Unknown | 14 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 25 | 28% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 12 | 13% |
| Computer Science | 9 | 10% |
| Decision Sciences | 5 | 6% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 17 | 19% |
| Unknown | 18 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 February 2017.
All research outputs
#1,098,975
of 22,925,760 outputs
Outputs from Scientometrics
#181
of 2,688 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,373
of 421,214 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientometrics
#7
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,925,760 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,688 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 421,214 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.