IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/infome/v19y2025i4s1751157725001014.html

A method for evaluating the productivity and research diversity of an individual scientific research paper

Author

Listed:
  • Peleg, Avner

Abstract

We develop a method for evaluating the productivity and research diversity of an individual scientific research paper. The method is based on the productivity and research diversity indicator (PRDI), which measures the value of the paper based on a combination of the number of descendant papers of the evaluated paper, nd, and the number of research directions emerging from it, nr. We define the basic PRDI P by P=ln⁡(nd+1)+nr, and develop a detailed procedure for calculating it. We then describe an informative generalization of the basic PRDI calculation, which is based on perturbing two of the main steps in the basic calculation. The perturbation generates statistics of the basic PRDI value, and the generalized PRDI, P(g), is defined as the mean value of P for the generalized calculation. We demonstrate the method and the insights that it can provide by applying it for three example papers, which started new research directions within the general research area of the evaluated author. We explain how the method and its ingredients can be used as additional in-depth tools in decisions on tenure, promotion, and hiring in academic institutions, in peer-review of scientific papers, and in analysis of the development of scientific concepts in various areas of science and engineering. Furthermore, our study introduces a number of mathematical methods, such as coarse-graining, perturbation-induced statistics, and coarse-grained genealogical charts, which can be useful in data science applications in general.

Suggested Citation

  • Peleg, Avner, 2025. "A method for evaluating the productivity and research diversity of an individual scientific research paper," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 19(4).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:19:y:2025:i:4:s1751157725001014
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2025.101739
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157725001014
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joi.2025.101739?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo, 2011. "Evaluating research: from informed peer review to bibliometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 499-514, June.
    2. Guo Zhang & Ying Ding & Staša Milojević, 2013. "Citation content analysis (CCA): A framework for syntactic and semantic analysis of citation content," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(7), pages 1490-1503, July.
    3. Jingda Ding & Chao Liu & Goodluck Asobenie Kandonga, 2020. "Exploring the limitations of the h-index and h-type indexes in measuring the research performance of authors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(3), pages 1303-1322, March.
    4. Lee Pinkowitz, 2002. "Research Dissemination and Impact: Evidence from Web Site Downloads," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(1), pages 485-499, February.
    5. Guo Zhang & Ying Ding & Staša Milojević, 2013. "Citation content analysis (CCA): A framework for syntactic and semantic analysis of citation content," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(7), pages 1490-1503, July.
    6. González-Pereira, Borja & Guerrero-Bote, Vicente P. & Moya-Anegón, Félix, 2010. "A new approach to the metric of journals’ scientific prestige: The SJR indicator," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 379-391.
    7. Zhang, Chengzhi & Xiang, Yi & Hao, Wenke & Li, Zhicheng & Qian, Yuchen & Wang, Yuzhuo, 2023. "Automatic recognition and classification of future work sentences from academic articles in a specific domain," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1).
    8. Costas, Rodrigo & Bordons, María, 2007. "The h-index: Advantages, limitations and its relation with other bibliometric indicators at the micro level," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 193-203.
    9. Henk F. Moed, 2005. "Statistical relationships between downloads and citations at the level of individual documents within a single journal," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 56(10), pages 1088-1097, August.
    10. Xiaodan Zhu & Peter Turney & Daniel Lemire & André Vellino, 2015. "Measuring academic influence: Not all citations are equal," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(2), pages 408-427, February.
    11. Christian Schlögl & Juan Gorraiz & Christian Gumpenberger & Kris Jack & Peter Kraker, 2014. "Comparison of downloads, citations and readership data for two information systems journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(2), pages 1113-1128, November.
    12. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo, 2014. "How do you define and measure research productivity?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(2), pages 1129-1144, November.
    13. Vincent Larivière & Rodrigo Costas, 2016. "How Many Is Too Many? On the Relationship between Research Productivity and Impact," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-10, September.
    14. Hilary I. Okagbue & Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, 2020. "Correlation between the CiteScore and Journal Impact Factor of top-ranked library and information science journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 797-801, July.
    15. Dag W. Aksnes & Liv Langfeldt & Paul Wouters, 2019. "Citations, Citation Indicators, and Research Quality: An Overview of Basic Concepts and Theories," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(1), pages 21582440198, February.
    16. Alonso, S. & Cabrerizo, F.J. & Herrera-Viedma, E. & Herrera, F., 2009. "h-Index: A review focused in its variants, computation and standardization for different scientific fields," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 273-289.
    17. Hui Fang, 2021. "Analysis of the new scopus CiteScore," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 5321-5331, June.
    18. Meijun Liu & Yi Bu & Chongyan Chen & Jian Xu & Daifeng Li & Yan Leng & Richard B. Freeman & Eric T. Meyer & Wonjin Yoon & Mujeen Sung & Minbyul Jeong & Jinhyuk Lee & Jaewoo Kang & Chao Min & Min Song , 2022. "Pandemics are catalysts of scientific novelty: Evidence from COVID‐19," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(8), pages 1065-1078, August.
    19. Éric Archambault & Vincent Larivière, 2009. "History of the journal impact factor: Contingencies and consequences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 79(3), pages 635-649, June.
    20. Mike Thelwall & Kayvan Kousha & Emma Stuart & Meiko Makita & Mahshid Abdoli & Paul Wilson & Jonathan Levitt, 2023. "In which fields are citations indicators of research quality?," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 74(8), pages 941-953, August.
    21. Waltman, Ludo, 2016. "A review of the literature on citation impact indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 365-391.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mingkun Wei, 2020. "Research on impact evaluation of open access journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(2), pages 1027-1049, February.
    2. Waltman, Ludo, 2016. "A review of the literature on citation impact indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 365-391.
    3. Raminta Pranckutė, 2021. "Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-59, March.
    4. Maura Mezzetti & Ilia Negri, 2024. "Hierarchical Bayesian model to estimate and compare research productivity of Italian academic statisticians," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(12), pages 7443-7474, December.
    5. Pantea Kamrani & Isabelle Dorsch & Wolfgang G. Stock, 2021. "Do researchers know what the h-index is? And how do they estimate its importance?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 5489-5508, July.
    6. Parul Khurana & Kiran Sharma, 2022. "Impact of h-index on author’s rankings: an improvement to the h-index for lower-ranked authors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4483-4498, August.
    7. William Cabos & Juan Miguel Campanario, 2018. "Exploring the Hjif-Index, an Analogue to the H-Like Index for Journal Impact Factors," Publications, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-11, April.
    8. Yu Liu & Wei Zuo & Ying Gao & Yanhong Qiao, 2013. "Comprehensive geometrical interpretation of h-type indices," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(2), pages 605-615, August.
    9. Mingers, John & Yang, Liying, 2017. "Evaluating journal quality: A review of journal citation indicators and ranking in business and management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 257(1), pages 323-337.
    10. Zhang, Fang & Wu, Shengli, 2020. "Predicting future influence of papers, researchers, and venues in a dynamic academic network," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2).
    11. Lyu, Haihua & Bu, Yi & Zhao, Zhenyue & Zhang, Jiarong & Li, Jiang, 2022. "Citation bias in measuring knowledge flow: Evidence from the web of science at the discipline level," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).
    12. Mingers, John & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2015. "A review of theory and practice in scientometrics," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(1), pages 1-19.
    13. Xiaorui Jiang & Jingqiang Chen, 2023. "Contextualised segment-wise citation function classification," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(9), pages 5117-5158, September.
    14. Xu, Shuqi & Mariani, Manuel Sebastian & Lü, Linyuan & Medo, Matúš, 2020. "Unbiased evaluation of ranking metrics reveals consistent performance in science and technology citation data," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(1).
    15. Hamid R. Jamali & Majid Nabavi & Saeid Asadi, 2018. "How video articles are cited, the case of JoVE: Journal of Visualized Experiments," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(3), pages 1821-1839, December.
    16. Brito, Ana C.M. & Silva, Filipi N. & de Arruda, Henrique F. & Comin, Cesar H. & Amancio, Diego R. & Costa, Luciano da F., 2021. "Classification of abrupt changes along viewing profiles of scientific articles," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2).
    17. Kayvan Kousha & Mike Thelwall, 2024. "Factors associating with or predicting more cited or higher quality journal articles: An Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST) paper," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 75(3), pages 215-244, March.
    18. Kexin Ren & Johnny F. I Lam, 2026. "Knowledge graph-driven digital preservation of intangible cultural heritage: a cross-cultural comparative study of Chinese and Western implementation paradigms," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 13(1), pages 1-25, December.
    19. CholMyong Pak & Guang Yu & Weibin Wang, 2018. "A study on the citation situation within the citing paper: citation distribution of references according to mention frequency," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 905-918, March.
    20. Jiang, Xiaorui & Zhuge, Hai, 2019. "Forward search path count as an alternative indirect citation impact indicator," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(4).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:19:y:2025:i:4:s1751157725001014. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/joi .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.