Investigación textil en España: un caso de aplicación de indicadores bibliométricos a nivel micro

Enric Carrera-Gallissà; Xavier Capdevila

doi:10.3989/redc.2011.4.832

Authors

Enric Carrera-Gallissà Departamento de Ingeniería Textil y Papelera, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, EET, Terrassa, España
Xavier Capdevila Departamento de Ingeniería Textil y Papelera, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, EET, Terrassa, España.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2011.4.832

Keywords:

h Index, Spain, Textile researchers, Bibliometrics indicators

Abstract

The study examines the h-index of textile researchers in Spain and, for the first time, provides information, on the range of values of this index in the area of textilerelated knowledge. This paper reports on a study of 10 scientific production indicators for Spanish textile researchers over the period 1955-2009. The population studied consisted of 73 researchers affiliated with 6 different institutions. Textile investigators represent a heterogeneous community, since they come from different areas of knowledge. The h-index studied presents a positive correlation, ranging between intense and notable, with the number of publications, publications by year, number of citations, citations per year, number of citations received by the most cited publication. The correlation is significant but negative concerning the percentage of authors’ non-cited publications.The Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC) has higher levels than the other institutions for the following indicators: h-index, number of publications, citations, citation per year, maximum number of citations. The Instituto Tecnológico Textil de Alcoy (AITEX) has the highest levels for the following indicators: h-index per year of activity and percentage of non-cited publications. Finally, a relation is shown between the h-index and three (latent) factors that explain the other indicators and provide three dimensions of the h-index.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Buela-Casal, G. (2001). La Psicología española y su proyección internacional. El problema del criterio: Internacional, calidad y castellano y/o inglés. Papeles Del Psicólogo, vol. 79, 53-57.

Buela-Casal, G. (2002). La evaluación de la Investigación Científica: El criterio de la opinión de la mayoría, El Factor de Impacto, El Factor de Prestigio y «Los Diez Mandamientos » para incrementar las citas. Análisis y Modificación de la Conducta, vol. 28, 455-476.

Buela-Casal, G. (2003). Evaluación de la calidad de los artículos y de las Revistas Científicas: Propuesta del Factor de Impacto Ponderado y de un Índice de Calidad. Psicothema, vol. 15, n.º 1, 23-35.

Buela-Casal, G., y otros. (2006). Measuring Internationality: Reflections and Perspectives on Academic Journals. Scientometrics, 2006, vol. 67, 45-65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0050-z

Costas, R., y Bordons, M. (2007). Una visión crítica del Indice h: algunas consideraciones derivadas de su aplicación práctica. El Profesional de la Información, vol. 16, no. 5, 427-432. http://dx.doi.org/10.3145/epi.2007.sep.04

Cronin, B.,y Meho, L. I. (2006). Using the h-index to rank influential information scientists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, vol. 57, n.º 9, 1275-1278.

Garfield, E. (1955). Citation Index for Science: A New Dimension in Documentation through Association of Ideas. SCIENCE, vol. 12, 108-111. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.122.3159.108 PMid:14385826

Garfield, E. (1984). Essays of an information scientist. ISI Press ed., Philadelphia: ISI Press. How to use Citation Analysis for Faculty Evaluations, and when is it Relevant? Parts 1 and 2., 354-372.

Garfield, E. (1996). Fortnightly Review: How can Impact Factors be Improved? British Medical Journal, vol. 313, 411-413. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.313.7054.411 PMid:8761234 PMCid:2351785

Grupo SCIMAGO. (2007). El Índice h de Hirsch: su aplicación a algunos de los científicos españoles más destacados. El Profesional de la Información, vol. 16, n.º 1, 47-49.

Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An Index to Quantify an individual’s Scientific Output. Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences USA, vol. 102, 16.569-16.572. Iglesias, J. E., y Pecharromán, C. (2006). Scaling the h-Index for Different Scientific Fields. http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0607224

Imperial, J., y Rodríguez-Navarro, A. (2009). Utilidad del Índice h de Hirsch para evaluar la investigación en España. Mi+d. http://www.madrimasd.org/informacionIdi/analisis/analisis/analisis.asp?id=24360&sec=2

ISI. (1999). Citations Reveal Concentrated Influences: Some Fields have it, but what does it means. Science Watch, vol. january-february, n.º 1. Kelly, C. D., y Jennions, M. D. (2006). The h-Index and Career Assessment by Numbers. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, vol. 21, n.º 4, 167-170.

Nieminen, P., y otros. (2006). The Relationship between Quality of Research and Citation Frequency. BMC Medical Research, 2006, vol. 6, 42.

Pritcchard, A. (1969). Statiscal Bibliography Or Bibliometrics? Journal of Documentation, vol. 25, n.º 4, 348-349.

Salgado, J. F., y Páez, D. (2007). La poductividad científi ca y el Índice h de Hirchs de la Psicología Social Española: Convergencia entre Indicadores de productividad y comparación con otras áreas. Psicothema, vol. 19, 179-189. PMid:17425885

Seglen,O. P. (1992). How Representative is the Journal Impact Factor? Research Evaluation, vol. 2, 143-149.

Seglen, O. P. (1997). Why the Impact Factor Journals should Not be used for Evaluating Research. BMJ, 1997, vol. 314, 498-502. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.314.7079.497

Seglen, O. P. (1998). Citation and Journal Impact Factors are Not Suitable for Evaluation of Research. Acta Orthophedica Scandinavia, 1998, vol. 69, 224-229. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453679809000920

Simkim, M. V., y Rovchowdhhury, V. P. (2003). Read before You Cite! Complex Syst, vol. 14, 269-274.

van Raan, A. F. J. (2006). Comparisons of the Hirsch-Index with Standard Bibliometric Indicators and with Peer Judgment for 147 Chemistry Research Groups. Scientometrics, vol. 67, n.º 3, 491-502.