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 (SICRIS). Agricultural groups are mapped into four subfields: Forestry & 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.
COBISS.SI-ID: 8459641
Introduction. The paper presents one segment of the first comprehensive national study investigating information behaviour of Slovenian researchers in all research disciplines in relation to selected demographic variables. Method. An online survey was used, containing content and demographic questions. It was based on a random sample of the central registry of all active researchers in Slovenia in all scientific disciplines and all age groups. Analysis. Descriptive and bivariate analysis were employed. Results. The most noticeable demographic elements of influence are age and discipline, and in a few cases also sex. In certain areas, the information behaviour of researchers under study conforms with general trends, for example in power-browsing, squirreling, skimming, etc. Information technologies have a strong impact on research work and collaboration. A fairly large segment of researchers often work alone; this is particularly characteristic of researchers in the humanities. Low use of open access documents and weak foreign collaboration in some disciplines are also evidenced. Conclusions. Despite some expected outcomes, certain previously unknown and noteworthy patterns have been identified which are characteristic of Slovenian researchers. This information constitutes a useful foundation for further research in this area.
COBISS.SI-ID: 57703778
The rise of the Web 2.0 (Social web) has given the main incentive to the creation of altmetrics, which are social web metrics for academic purposes. They can, theoretically, be used in an evaluative role and as an information seeking aid, both tasks reserved until recently for traditional bibliometrics. If altmetrics are to be trusted then the claims about both of these tasks must be acceptable and verifiable. Regarding the growing number of scientific publications on altmetrics and its methods, researchers in the field of scientific metrics are now trying to assess this possibility as well. The question is which parts of these new metrics are acceptable for a scientific community? Decades were needed to establish a reasonable confidence in classical bibliometrical methods, such as citation analysis, so how long will it take for altmetrics to gain the same level of trust? This is an important although quite neglected topic. The paper presents a continuation of a survey on information behaviour of Slovenian researchers in 2011 on a random sample obtained from the complete list of researchers in Slovenia. The results confirm the already detected low level of use and acceptance of Web 2.0 tools among Slovenian researchers. On the other hand, the results also show a strong interest in altmetrics and the possibilities for alternative evaluation. This interest calls for further research into the possibilities offered by these new metrics. We need to explore the applicability, use and acceptance of altmetrics and its various possible sources and indicators in the scientific community. Also, we need to inform the scientists about these new possibilities. This should be an important task for all who are involved professionally (research or otherwise) in the field of scientific research evaluation.
COBISS.SI-ID: 54950242