LEADER 03982nam 2200781z- 450 001 9910595074403321 005 20220916 035 $a(CKB)5680000000080782 035 $a(oapen)https://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/92095 035 $a(oapen)doab92095 035 $a(EXLCZ)995680000000080782 100 $a20202209d2022 |y 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aurmn|---annan 181 $ctxt$2rdacontent 182 $cc$2rdamedia 183 $acr$2rdacarrier 200 00$aModern Problems of Scientometric Assessment of Publication Activity 210 $aBasel$d2022 215 $a1 online resource (128 p.) 311 08$a3-0365-4831-9 311 08$a3-0365-4832-7 330 $aAs is known, an objective assessment of scientific activity is one of the most difficult problems, in terms of the relationship within itself as well as with society. However, for many decades, the significance of scientists' contribution to the development of the corresponding branch of science was assessed by the scientific community only by meaningful qualitative criteria, wherein the principle and mechanism of such an assessment was actually intuitive and defied quantitative description. That is why the urgent task was undertaken to create a system for evaluating scientific activity based on some objective indicators of the activity of a particular scientist; in search of such criteria, in the 1970s-1980s, the term "citation index" appeared. Although a close examination of this indicator revealed its limitations and in a number of cases even inadequacy in assessing scientific activity, it has nevertheless since the 1990s gained very wide popularity in the scientific community. This has contributed to the emergence of numerous works aimed at finding new and ideal indicators for assessing publication activity (so-called bibliometric indices). To date, several dozen such indices have been proposed, the most significant of which was the so-called Hirsch index or h-index. Nevertheless, despite the incredibly significant advances in this specific area of sociology, the above problem is still far from resolved. In this regard, the key task of this Special Issue is to familiarize its readers with the latest achievements both in the search for new, more advanced bibliometric indicators and in the improvement of existing ones. 606 $aHumanities$2bicssc 606 $aSocial interaction$2bicssc 610 $aacademic surgery 610 $aauthor-suggested weighted citation index 610 $abibliometric 610 $abibliometric indicators 610 $abibliometric measure 610 $acitation analysis 610 $aconference accreditation 610 $aconference impact factor 610 $aconference indicator 610 $aemerging country 610 $ahigher education 610 $ahuman capital 610 $aKazakhstan 610 $aLotka's law 610 $ameta-analysis 610 $an/a 610 $anetwork analysis 610 $apatent analysis 610 $apublication trend 610 $aresearch collaboration 610 $aresearch productivity 610 $aRussian professors 610 $ascholarly publications 610 $ascientific activity 610 $ascientific contribution of individual 610 $ascientometric indexes 610 $ascientometric indicators 610 $ascientometric politics 610 $ascientometrics 610 $asociological polls 610 $asustainable development goals 610 $asystematic review 610 $atechnology assessment 610 $atrends 610 $auniversities 615 7$aHumanities 615 7$aSocial interaction 700 $aMikhailov$b Oleg V$4edt$01311310 702 $aMikhailov$b Oleg V$4oth 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910595074403321 996 $aModern Problems of Scientometric Assessment of Publication Activity$93030228 997 $aUNINA