Bibliometric Profile of an Emerging Journal: Participatory Educational Research

Year 2022, Volume: 9 Issue: 4, 153 - 171, 01.07.2022

Rumiye Arslan Keziban Orbay , Metin Orbay

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.22.84.9.4

Cited By: 3

Abstract

“Participatory Educational Research (PER)” journal is one of the journals that contributes to the field of education and indexed in major international databases such as ERIC and Scopus. This study provides the bibliometric characteristic of the total 347 articles published in PER during the period of 2014-2021 using bibliometric analysis. Publish or Perish software to collect citation data from Google Scholar was used as an analysis instrument for the impact of the articles. It was found that short-titled articles received more citations than long-titled articles (over 2 times greater), but not statistically significant (p>0.05). On the other hand, correlation between citation and download numbers was found to be a statistically significant positive (rS=0.289 and rP=0.524; p<0.01). In the analysis of keywords and titles, it was observed that the prominent words overlapped with each other and with the purpose of journal as well. The most cited articles and the institutions contributing to national and international levels were analyzed too. It was concluded that 83.72% of the authors were in Turkey, there was no “institutional localization” among the institutions contributing at the national level and that they had achieved significant success in terms of national recognition. PER has gained significant momentum in academic standards and visibility since it first joined the umbrella organization DergiPark in 2019. It should be noted that amongst the most important points toward being open to development in the point of international recognition is the existence of contributions from Anglo-Saxon and Continental European countries, which have appeared as limited. According to the findings, it is discussed what can be done from this point onward based on basic publishing standards, publication content, national/international visibility, and citation analyses. The results can guide authors during the writing phase of studies and the editors and referees during the selection and evaluation phases.

Keywords

Bibliometric, Citation Analysis, Participatory Education Research (PER), Dergipark, Paper Usage Data

Supporting Institution

This study received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

References

• Abramo, G. (2018). Revisiting the scientometrics conceptualization of impact and its measurement, Journal of Informetrics, 12(3), 590-597.
• Albarrán, P., & Ruiz-Castillo, J. (2011). References made and citations received by scientific articles. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(1), 40-49.
• Allik, J., Lauk, K., & Realo, A. (2020). Factors predicting the scientific wealth of nations, Cross-Cultural Research, 54(4), 364-397.
• Aman, V., & Botte, A. (2017). A bibliometric view on the internationalization of European educational research. European Educational Research Journal, 16(6), 843-868.
• Andersen, H. (2000). Influence and reputation in the social sciences-how much do researchers agree?. Journal of Documentation, 56, 674-692.
• Archambault, É., & Larivière, V. (2010). The limits of bibliometrics for the analysis of the social sciences and humanities literature. World Social Science Report, 251-254.
• Arslan, R., Orbay, K., & Orbay, M. (2022). The tracking of paper usage data versus citation counts for Library Philosophy and Practice, Library Philosophy and Practice, (under review: MS-13511).
• Birkle, C., Pendlebury, D.A, Schnell, J., & Adams, J. (2020). Web of Science as a data source for research on scientific and scholarly activity. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(1), 363-376.
• Bornmann, L., & Leydesdorff, L. (2017). Skewness of citation impact data and covariates of citation distributions: a large-scale empirical analysis based on Web of Science data. Journal of Informetrics, 11(1), 164-175.
• Budd, J. M., & Magnuson, L. (2010). Higher education literature revisited: Citation patterns examined. Research in Higher Education, 51(3), 294-304.
• Civera, A., Lehmann, E. E., Paleari, S., & Stockinger, S. A. (2020). Higher education policy: Why hope for quality when rewarding quantity? Research Policy, 49(8), 104083.
• Clarivate Analytics. (2022). Web of Science Journal Evaluation Process and Selection Criteria. https://clarivate.com/webofsciencegroup/journal-evaluation-process-and-selection-criteria/, Accessed January 15, 2022.
• Diem, A., & Wolter, S.C. (2013). The use of bibliometrics to measure research performance in the education sciences. Research in Higher Education, 54(1), 86-114.
• Doğan, G., Dhyi, S.M.M.A., & Al, U. (2018). A Research on Turkey-addressed dropped journals from Web of Science. Turkish Librarianship, 32(3), 151-162.
• Doğan, G., Şencan, İ., & Tonta, Y. (2016). Does dirty data affect google scholar citations?. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 53(1), 1-4.
• Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W.M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285-296.
• Elgendi, M. (2019). Characteristics of a highly cited article: A machine learning perspective. IEEE Access, 7, 87977-87986.
• Engels, T.C.E., Ossenblok, T.L.B., & Spruyt, E.H.J. (2012). Changing publication patterns in the social sciences and humanities, 2000-2009. Scientometrics, 93(2), 373-390.
• Fire, M., & Guestrin, C. (2019). Over-optimization of academic publishing metrics: observing Goodhart’s Law in action. GigaScience, 8(6), giz053.
• Gastel, B., & Day, R.A. (2017). How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper. (8th ed.). Cambridge University Press.
• George, D., & Mallery, M. (2010). SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference, 17.0 update (10th ed.), Pearson, Boston.
• Gnewuch, M., & Wohlrabe, K. (2017). Title characteristics and citations in economics. Scientometrics, 110(3), 1573-1578.
• Goodyear, R.K., Brewer, D.J., Gallagher, K.S., Tracey, T.J.G., Claiborn, C.D., Lichtenberg, J.W., & Wampold, B.E. (2009). The intellectual foundations of education: core journals and their impacts on scholarship and practice. Educational Researcher, 38(9), 700-706.
• Hartley, J. (2008). Academic writing and publishing: A practical handbook. Routledge.
• Harzing, A. W., & Alakangas, S. (2016). Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: a longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics, 106(2), 787-804.
• Harzing, A.W. (2007). Publish or Perish, available from https://harzing.com/resources/publish-or-perish, Accessed January 15, 2022.
• Henriksen, D. (2016). The rise in co-authorship in the social sciences (1980-2013). Scientometrics, 107(2), 455-476.
• Hicks, D. (1999). The difficulty of achieving full coverage of international social science literature and the bibliometric consequences. Scientometrics, 44(2), 193-215.
• Hicks, D. (2012). One size doesn’t fit all: On the co-evolution of national evaluation systems and social science publishing. Confero: Essays on Education, Philosophy and Politics, 1(1), 67- 90.
• Hu, B., Ding, Y., Dong, X., Bu, Y., & Ding, Y. (2021). On the relationship between download and citation counts: An introduction of Granger-causality inference. Journal of Informetrics, 15(2), 101125.
• Huang, D.W. (2016). Positive correlation between quality and quantity in academic journals. Journal of Informetrics, 10(2), 329-335.
• Jacsó, P. (2005) Google Scholar: the pros and the cons. Online Information Review, 29(2), 208-214.
• Jacsó, P. (2009). Calculating the h‐index and other bibliometric and scientometrics indicators from Google Scholar with the Publish or Perish software. Online Information Review, 33(6), 1189-1200.
• Jamali, H. R., & Nikzad, M. (2011). Article title type and its relation with the number of downloads and citations. Scientometrics, 88(2), 653-661.
• Larivière, V., Archambault, É., Gingras, Y., & Vignola-Gagné, É. (2006). The place of serials in referencing practices: comparing natural sciences and engineering with social sciences and humanities. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(8), 997-1004.
• Letchford, A., Moat, H.S. & Preis T. (2015). The advantage of short paper titles. Royal Society Open Science, 2(150266), 1-6.
• Li, K., Rollins, J., & Yan, E. (2018). Web of Science use in published research and review papers 1997-2017: A selective, dynamic, cross-domain, content-based analysis. Scientometrics, 115(1), 1-20.
• Liu, W., Hu, G., & Gu, M. (2016). The probability of publishing in the first quartile journals, Scientometrics, 106(3), 1273-1276.
• McGrail, M.R., Rickard, C.M. & Jones, R. (2006). Publish or perish: A systematic review of interventions to increase academic publication rates. Higher Education Research & Development, 25(1), 19-35.
• Miranda, R., & Garcia-Carpintero, E. (2018). Overcitation and overrepresentation of review papers in the most cited papers, Journal of Informetrics, 12(4), 1015-1030.
• Moed, H.F. (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation. Dordrecht: Springer.
• Moed, H.F. (2006). Bibliometric rankings of world universities. CWTS Report, 1, 1-36.
• Nederhof, A. J. (2006). Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the social sciences and the humanities: A review. Scientometrics, 66(1), 81-100.
• Nieder, C., Dalhaug, A., & Aandahl, G. (2013). Correlation between article download and citation figures for highly accessed articles from five open access oncology journals. SpringerPlus, 2(1), 1-5.
• Orbay, K., Miranda, R., & Orbay, M. (2020). Building journal impact factor quartile into the assessment of academic performance: A case study. Participatory Educational Research, 7(2), 1-13.
• Orbay, M., Karamustafaoğlu, O., & Miranda, R. (2021). Analysis of the journal impact factor and related bibliometric indicators in education and educational research category. Education for Information, 37(3), 315-336.
• Öner, B.S., & Orbay, M. (2022). Assessing the publication output in the field of forensic science and legal medicine using Web of Science database from 2011 to 2020, Forensic Sciences Research, 1-15. (in press) https://doi.org/10.1080/20961790.2021.2002525
• Örnek, F., Miranda, R., & Orbay, M. (2021). Investigating the Journal Impact Factor of Special Education Journals Indexed in the Social Sciences Science Edition from Web of Science, Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals, Winter, 110-132.
• Özenç Uçak, N., & Al, U. (2008). Citation characteristics of social sciences theses. Journal of Faculty of Letters, 25(2), 223-240.
• Paiva, C.E., Lima, J.P.D.S. N., & Paiva, B.S.R. (2012). Articles with short titles describing the results are cited more often. Clinics, 67(5), 509-513.
• Pajić, D., & Jevremov J. (2014) Globally national-Locally international: Bibliometric analysis of a SEE psychology journal. Psihologija, 47(2), 263-267.
• PER-Participatory Educational Research (2022). https://www.perjournal.com/ Accessed January 15, 2022.
• Piwowar, H., Priem, J., & Orr, R. (2019). The Future of OA: A large-scale analysis projecting Open Access publication and readership. Biorxiv, 795310.
• Piwowar, H., Priem, J., Larivière, V., Alperin, J.P., Matthias, L., Norlander, B., Farley, A., West, J., & Haustein, S. (2018). The state of OA: a large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles. PeerJ, 6, e4375.
• Pranckutė, R. (2021). Web of Science and Scopus: The titans of bibliographic information in today’s academic world. Publications, 9(1), 12.
• Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics. Journal of Documentation, 25(4), 348-349.
• Riviera, E. (2013). Scientific communities as autopoietic systems: The reproductive function of citations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(7), 1442-1453.
• Rowlinson, M., Harvey, C., Kelly, A., Morris, H., & Todeva, E. (2015). Accounting for research quality: research audits and the journal rankings debate. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 26, 2-22.
• Schlögl, C., Gorraiz, J., Gumpenberger, C., Jack, K., & Kraker, P. (2014). Comparison of downloads, citations and readership data for two information systems journals. Scientometrics, 101(2), 1113-1128.
• Scopus. (2022). Content Policy and Selection Criteria. https://www.elsevier.com/solutions/scopus/how-scopus-works/content/content-policy-and-selection, Accessed February 15, 2022.
• Seglen, P.O. (1997). Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. BMJ, 314, 498-502. Sezgin, A., Orbay, K., & Orbay, M. (2022a). Educational research review from diverse perspectives: A Bibliometric analysis of Web of Science (2011-2020). Sage Open, SO-21-046 (under review).
• Sezgin, A., Orbay, K., & Orbay, M. (2022b). On the widespread impact of the most prolific countries in special education research. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 10 (2), 59-66.
• Shrivastava, R., & Mahajan, P. (2022). Altmetrics and their relationship with citation counts: a case of journal articles in physics. Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication, (in press). https://doi.org/10.1108/GKMC-07-2021-0122
• Sivertsen, G., & Larsen, B. (2012). Comprehensive bibliographic coverage of the social sciences and humanities in a citation index: An empirical analysis of the potential. Scientometrics, 91(2), 567-575.
• Sudah, S., Faccone, R. D., Nasra, M. H., Constantinescu, D., Menendez, M. E., & Nicholson, A. (2022). Twitter mentions influence academic citation count of shoulder and elbow surgery publications. Cureus, 14(1), 1-8.
• Tonta, Y. (2017). Journals published in Turkey and indexed in Web of Science: An evaluation. Turkish Librarianship, 31(4), 449-482.
• TR Index (2022). TR Index Application and Evaluation Processes, https://trdizin.gov.tr/en/criteria/?lang=en, Accessed January 15, 2022.
• ULAKBİM, Turkish Academic Network and Information Center (2022). https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/per, Accessed January 15, 2022.
• Van Dalen, H.P. (2021). How the publish-or-perish principle divides a science: the case of economists. Scientometrics, 126(2), 1675-1694.
• Van Eck NJ., & Waltman L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523-538.
• WordArt Software. 2022. World cloud art creator, https://wordart.com, Accessed January 15, 2022.
• Xue-li, L., Hong-ling, F., & Mei-ying, W. (2011). Correlation between download and citation and download-citation deviation phenomenon for some papers in Chinese medical journals. Serials Review, 37(3), 157-161.