IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v117y2018i1d10.1007_s11192-018-2855-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Field classification of publications in Dimensions: a first case study testing its reliability and validity

Author

Listed:
  • Lutz Bornmann

    (Administrative Headquarters of the Max Planck Society)

Abstract

Dimensions is a research data infrastructure and tool, including grants, publications, citations, clinical trials, and patents in one place. An interesting feature of Dimensions is its field classification scheme, which is not based on journal classification systems, as in the Web of Science or Scopus, but on machine learning. Each publication is assigned to at least one field. Using the set of my own publications, I investigated whether they were reliably and validly assigned to fields. The results put in question the reliability and validity of the scheme. Large scale studies seem necessary to investigate the scheme in more detail.

Suggested Citation

  • Lutz Bornmann, 2018. "Field classification of publications in Dimensions: a first case study testing its reliability and validity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 637-640, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:117:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-018-2855-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-018-2855-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-018-2855-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-018-2855-y?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thelwall, Mike, 2018. "Dimensions: A competitor to Scopus and the Web of Science?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 430-435.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gerson Pech & Catarina Delgado & Silvio Paolo Sorella, 2022. "Classifying papers into subfields using Abstracts, Titles, Keywords and KeyWords Plus through pattern detection and optimization procedures: An application in Physics," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(11), pages 1513-1528, November.
    2. Christian Herzog & Brian Kierkegaard Lunn, 2018. "Response to the letter ‘Field classification of publications in Dimensions: a first case study testing its reliability and validity’," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 641-645, October.
    3. Lin Zhang & Beibei Sun & Fei Shu & Ying Huang, 2022. "Comparing paper level classifications across different methods and systems: an investigation of Nature publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7633-7651, December.
    4. Michael Gusenbauer, 2022. "Search where you will find most: Comparing the disciplinary coverage of 56 bibliographic databases," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2683-2745, May.
    5. 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.
    6. Gabriela F. Nane & Nicolas Robinson-Garcia & François Schalkwyk & Daniel Torres-Salinas, 2023. "COVID-19 and the scientific publishing system: growth, open access and scientific fields," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(1), pages 345-362, January.

    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. Vivek Kumar Singh & Prashasti Singh & Mousumi Karmakar & Jacqueline Leta & Philipp Mayr, 2021. "The journal coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A comparative analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 5113-5142, June.
    2. Zoltán Lakner & Brigitta Plasek & Gyula Kasza & Anna Kiss & Sándor Soós & Ágoston Temesi, 2021. "Towards Understanding the Food Consumer Behavior–Food Safety–Sustainability Triangle: A Bibliometric Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-23, November.
    3. Ghassan Abdul-Majeed & Elameer Amer Saleem & Drai A. Smait & Sadiq H. Abdulhussain & Sadiq M. Sait & Hasan S. Majdi & Haydar Abdulameer Marhoon & Waleed Khalid Al-Azzawi, 2023. "Implementation of a new research indicator to QS ranking system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(2), pages 1351-1365, February.
    4. Mike Thelwall, 2021. "Alternative medicines worth researching? Citation analyses of acupuncture, chiropractic, homeopathy, and osteopathy 1996–2017," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(10), pages 8731-8747, October.
    5. Mike Thelwall, 2020. "Data in Brief: Can a mega-journal for data be useful?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 697-709, July.
    6. Andrzej Lis & Agata Sudolska & Mateusz Tomanek, 2020. "Mapping Research on Sustainable Supply-Chain Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-26, May.
    7. Hunter Bennett & Flynn Slattery, 2023. "Graphical abstracts are associated with greater Altmetric attention scores, but not citations, in sport science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(6), pages 3793-3804, June.
    8. Xu, Fang & Ou, Guiyan & Ma, Tingcan & Wang, Xianwen, 2021. "The consistency of impact of preprints and their journal publications," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2).
    9. Anne-Wil Harzing, 2019. "Two new kids on the block: How do Crossref and Dimensions compare with Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus and the Web of Science?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(1), pages 341-349, July.
    10. 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.
    11. Cannavacciuolo, Lorella & Ferraro, Giovanna & Ponsiglione, Cristina & Primario, Simonetta & Quinto, Ivana, 2023. "Technological innovation-enabling industry 4.0 paradigm: A systematic literature review," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    12. Okechukwu Okorie & Konstantinos Salonitis & Fiona Charnley & Mariale Moreno & Christopher Turner & Ashutosh Tiwari, 2018. "Digitisation and the Circular Economy: A Review of Current Research and Future Trends," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-31, November.
    13. Secundo, Giustina & Rippa, Pierluigi & Cerchione, Roberto, 2020. "Digital Academic Entrepreneurship: A structured literature review and avenue for a research agenda," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    14. Stephan Stahlschmidt & Dimity Stephen, 2022. "From indexation policies through citation networks to normalized citation impacts: Web of Science, Scopus, and Dimensions as varying resonance chambers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2413-2431, May.
    15. Juan Andrés Cabral & Florencia Iara Pucci, 2020. "¿Cuál es el alcance de la revolución de la credibilidad?," Asociación Argentina de Economía Política: Working Papers 4318, Asociación Argentina de Economía Política.
    16. Alberto Martín-Martín & Mike Thelwall & Enrique Orduna-Malea & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2021. "Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: a multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 871-906, January.
    17. Secundo, Giustina & Ndou, Valentina & Vecchio, Pasquale Del & De Pascale, Gianluigi, 2020. "Sustainable development, intellectual capital and technology policies: A structured literature review and future research agenda," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    18. Mike Thelwall & Nabeil Maflahi, 2020. "Academic collaboration rates and citation associations vary substantially between countries and fields," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 71(8), pages 968-978, August.
    19. Philip J. Purnell, 2021. "Conference proceedings publications in bibliographic databases: a case study of countries in Southeast Asia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 355-387, January.

    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:spr:scient:v:117:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-018-2855-y. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.