发表机构
Atlantic Technological University（大西洋理工大学）
机构由 AI 辅助整理，请以论文原文为准。AI 中文总结
本研究基于ASJC分区前10%被引论文构建研究者追踪指标，发现其可预测研究者后续高被引表现，且定性同行评审与文献影响力识别的研究者群体差异显著，建议预筛选时增加数据使用以提升文献影响力。
AI 中文摘要
领域加权引用量近似服从对数正态分布已得到广泛认可，这种偏态反映了注意力竞争：多数出版物会逐渐被遗忘，仅少数在数年后仍被持续引用。利用这一观察结果，我们基于所有科学期刊分类（ASJC）分区中被引排名前10%的论文的作者身份，构建了研究者层面的指标，并将其应用于典型资助周期内爱尔兰机构的出版物。主要聚焦原创研究论文后，我们发现，在某一年发表严格超过1篇ASJC前十分位论文的研究者，在后续年份会持续参与文献的高被引尾部，因此这一简单的追踪记录指标具有预测价值。相比之下，通过定性同行评审选出的爱尔兰研究基金会（Research Ireland）和欧洲研究理事会（European Research Council）受资助者队列中的中位研究者，要么未发表前十分位论文，要么发表量低于我们排名中的中位研究者。这些结果表明，定性同行评审判定的研究卓越性与对研究文献的影响力所识别的研究者群体存在显著差异。在缺乏证据的情况下，资助机构和大学可能会将这两者混为一谈。尽管研究声誉可通过多种渠道提升，但高被引论文是国际学术影响力最广泛可观测的表现形式。我们的分析表明，在定性同行评审前的追踪记录预筛选中更多使用数据，或可提升文献影响力。
英文摘要
It is well recognised that field weighted citations are approximately lognormally distributed. This skewness reflects competition for attention, whereby most publications are gradually forgotten and only a minority continue to be recalled years later. Exploiting this observation, we construct a researcher-level indicator based on authorship of top 10% cited papers in All Science Journal Code (ASJC) bins and apply it to publications affiliated with Irish institutions over a typical funding cycle. Restricting attention largely to original research papers, we find that researchers authoring strictly more than one ASJC top-decile paper in a given year exhibit persistent participation in the highly cited tail of the literature in subsequent years, thus the simple track record indicator possesses predictive value. In contrast, the median researcher in cohorts of Research Ireland and European Research Council awardees selected through qualitative peer review either authors no top-decile paper or less than the median researcher in our ranking. These results demonstrate that research excellence as judged by qualitative peer review and influence on the research literature identify substantially different cohorts of researchers. In the absence of evidence, funding bodies and universities may conflate these two. While research reputation may be enhanced through many channels, highly cited papers constitute the most widely observable manifestation of international scholarly influence. Our analysis indicates that literature influence may be improved through greater use of data in track record pre-screening prior to qualitative peer review.
Comments24 pages, comments welcome
