Mapping and classification of agriculture in Web of Science: other subject categories and research fields may benefit
Abstract Fields of science (FOS) can be used for the assessment of publishing patterns and scientific output. To this end, WOS JCR (Web of Science/Journal Citation Reports) subject categories are often mapped to Frascati-related OECD FOS (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development). Although WOS categories are widely employed, they reflect agriculture (one of six major FOS) less comprehensively. Other fields may benefit from agricultural WOS mapping. The aim was to map all articles produced nationally (Slovenia) by agricultural research groups, over two decades, to their corresponding journals and categories in order to visualize the strength of links between the categories and scatter of articles, based on WOS-linked raw data in COBISS/SciMet portal (Co-operative Online Bibliographic System and Services/Science Metrics) and national CRIS—Slovenian Current Research Information System. Agricultural groups are mapped into four subfields: Forestry and Wood Science, Plant Production, Animal Production, and Veterinary Science. Food science is comprised as either plant- or animal-product-related. On average, 50 % of relevant articles are published outside the scope of journals mapped to WOS agricultural categories. The other half are mapped mostly to OECD Natural-, Medical- and Health Sciences, and Engineering-and-Technology. A few selected journals and principal categories account for an important part of all relevant documents (core). Even many core journals/categories as ascertained with power laws (Bradford’s law) are not mapped to agriculture. Research-evaluation based on these classifications may underestimate multidisciplinary dimensions of agriculture, affecting its position among scientific fields and also subsequent funding if established on such ranking.
Volume (Year): 109 (2016)
Issue (Month): 2 (November)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.springer.com|
Web page: http://akkrt.hu/
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11192|
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Vanloqueren, Gaëtan & Baret, Philippe V., 2009. "How agricultural research systems shape a technological regime that develops genetic engineering but locks out agroecological innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 971-983, July.
- Zhang, Lin & Liu, Xinhai & Janssens, Frizo & Liang, Liming & Glänzel, Wolfgang, 2010. "Subject clustering analysis based on ISI category classification," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 185-193.
- Yan, Erjia & Ding, Ying & Cronin, Blaise & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2013. "A bird's-eye view of scientific trading: Dependency relations among fields of science," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 249-264.
- Cova, Tânia F.G.G. & Jarmelo, Susana & Formosinho, Sebastião J. & de Melo, J. Sérgio Seixas & Pais, Alberto A.C.C., 2015. "Unsupervised characterization of research institutions with task-force estimation," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 59-68.
- Pedro Albarrán & Ignacio Ortuño & Javier Ruiz-Castillo, 2011.
"Average-based versus high- and low-impact indicators for the evaluation of scientific distributions,"
Oxford University Press, vol. 20(4), pages 325-339, October.
- Ruiz-Castillo, Javier & Ortuño, Ignacio & Albarrán, Pedro, 2010. "Average-based versus high-and low-impact indicators for the evaluation of scientific distributions," UC3M Working papers. Economics we1040, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
- Albarrán, Pedro & Ortuño-Ortín, Ignacio & Ruiz-Castillo, Javier, 2010. "Average-based versus High- and Low-Impact Indicators for the Evaluation of Scientific Distributions," CEPR Discussion Papers 7887, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Bornmann, Lutz & Marx, Werner, 2015. "Methods for the generation of normalized citation impact scores in bibliometrics: Which method best reflects the judgements of experts?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 408-418.
- Diego Chavarro & Puay Tang & Ismael Rafols, 2014.
"Interdisciplinarity and research on local issues: evidence from a developing country,"
Oxford University Press, vol. 23(3), pages 195-209.
- Diego Chavarro & Puay Tang & Ismael Rafols, 2013. "Interdisciplinarity and research on local issues: evidence from a developing country," SPRU Working Paper Series 2013-14, SPRU - Science and Technology Policy Research, University of Sussex.
- Ruiz-Castillo, Javier & Waltman, Ludo, 2015.
"Field-normalized citation impact indicators using algorithmically constructed classification systems of science,"
Journal of Informetrics,
Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 102-117.
- Waltman, Ludo & Ruiz-Castillo, Javier, 2014. "Field-normalized citation impact indicators using algorithmically constructed classification systems of science," UC3M Working papers. Economics we1403, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
- Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & Esther FerrÃ¡ndiz & M. Dolores LeÃ³n, 2014. "Regional Scientific Production and Specialization in Europe: The Role of HERD," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(5), pages 949-974, May.
- Valderrama-Zurián, Juan-Carlos & Aguilar-Moya, Remedios & Melero-Fuentes, David & Aleixandre-Benavent, Rafael, 2015. "A systematic analysis of duplicate records in Scopus," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 570-576.
- Jun-Lin Ren & Peng-Hui Lyu & Xin-Mu Wu & Fei-Cheng Ma & Zhi-Zhang Wang & Gang Yang, 2013. "An Informetric Profile of Water Resources Management Literatures," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 27(13), pages 4679-4696, October.
- Rafols, Ismael & Leydesdorff, Loet & O’Hare, Alice & Nightingale, Paul & Stirling, Andy, 2012. "How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1262-1282.
- Ismael Rafols & Loet Leydesdorff & Alice O'Hare & Paul Nightingale & Andy Stirling, 2011. "How Journal Rankings can suppress Interdisciplinary Research – A Comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management," DRUID Working Papers 11-05, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
- Thelwall, Mike & Fairclough, Ruth, 2015. "Geometric journal impact factors correcting for individual highly cited articles," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 263-272.
- Ludo Waltman & Clara Calero-Medina & Joost Kosten & Ed C.M. Noyons & Robert J.W. Tijssen & Nees Jan Eck & Thed N. Leeuwen & Anthony F.J. Raan & Martijn S. Visser & Paul Wouters, 2012. "The Leiden ranking 2011/2012: Data collection, indicators, and interpretation," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(12), pages 2419-2432, December.
- Bourke, Paul & Butler, Linda, 1998. "Institutions and the map of science: matching university departments and fields of research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 711-718, February. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:109:y:2016:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-016-2071-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla)or (Rebekah McClure)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.