This paper aims to investigate the extent to which researchers display citation, and wants to examine whether there are researcher differences in citation personal display at the level of university, country, and academic rank. Physicists in 11 well-known universities in USA, Britain, and China were chosen as the object of study. It was manually identified if physicists had mentioned citation counts, citation-based indices, or a link to Google Scholar Citations (GSC) on the personal websites. A chi-square test is constructed to test researcher differences in citation personal display. Results showed that the overall proportion of citation personal display is not high (14.8%), with 129 of 870 physicists displaying citation. And physicists from different well-known universities indeed had a significant difference in citation personal display. Moreover, at the national level, it was noticed that physicists in well-known Chinese universities had the highest level of citation personal display, followed by Britain and the USA. Further, this study also found that researchers who had the academic rank of professor had the highest citation personal display. In addition, the differences in h-index personal display by university, country or academic rank were analyzed, and the results showed that they were not statistically significant.
Confidence and RISC: How Russian papers indexed in the national citation database Russian Index of Science Citation (RISC) characterize universities and research institutes
How to evaluate universities in terms of their relative citation impacts: Fractional counting of citations and the normalization of differences among disciplines
Can we use altmetrics at the institutional level? A case study analysing the coverage by research areas of four Spanish universities
基于社交媒体的指标或altmetrics在过去七年中一直受到审查。它们作为衡量学术影响力的替代指标的承诺还远未成为现实。迄今为止，大多数研究都集中在对高程指标的性质及其与引文数据的关系的理解上。很少有论文分析了基于高程数据的研究概况。其中大多数涉及研究人员概况和在研究人员中推广这些工具。本文旨在探讨Altmetric.com数据库的覆盖范围及其潜在用途，以显示大学与其他数据库的关系。我们分析了四所不同的西班牙大学的样本。首先，我们观察到高度指标的覆盖率很低，从Web of Science检索到的所有文档中只有36%具有“高度”分数。其次，我们观察到，对于分析的四所大学，科学领域显示出更高的“高度”分数，其余的研究领域。最后，考虑到机构层面的高程数据覆盖率较低，研究决策者不妨考虑制定准则和最佳做法指南，以确保研究人员通过社交媒体充分传播其研究成果。
Ranking and mapping of universities and research-focused institutions worldwide based on highly-cited papers: A visualization of results from multi-level models
How to analyse percentile impact data meaningfully in bibliometrics: The statistical analysis of distributions, percentile rank classes and top-cited papers
How to calculate the practical significance of citation impact differences? An empirical example from evaluative institutional bibliometrics using adjusted predictions and marginal effects
Research networks generated by organizational structures, co-authorships and citations: A Case Study of German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv)
The false myth of the rise in self-citations, and the impressively positive effect of bibliometric evaluations on the increase of the impact of Italian research
