Authorship, Citation, and Publication Characteristics Across 130 Years of the Journal of the American Chemical Society

References

• Abramo, G., C. A. D’Angelo, and F. Di Costa. 2021. On the relation between the degree of internationalization of cited and citing publications: A field level analysis, including and excluding self-citations. Journal of Informetrics 15 (1):101101. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2020.101101.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abramo, G., C. A. D’Angelo, and G. Murgia. 2017. The relationship among research productivity, research collaboration, and their determinants. Journal of Informetrics 11 (4):1016–30. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2017.09.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abt, H. A. 2007a. The frequencies of multinational papers in various sciences. Scientometrics 72:105–15. doi:10.1007/s11192-007-1686-z.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abt, H. A. 2007b. The future of single-authored papers. Scientometrics 73 (3):353–58. doi:10.1007/s11192-007-1822-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonn, G. S. 1963. Most-Used science and technology periodicals seen in study. Chemical & Engineering News 41 (19):68. doi:10.1021/cen-v041n019.p068.
   Google Scholar
• Bornmann, L., H. Schier, W. Marx, and H. D. Daniel. 2012. What factors determine citations counts of publications in chemistry besides their quality? Journal of Informetrics 6 (1):11–18. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2011.08.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butcher, J., and P. Jeffrey. 2005. The use of bibliometric indicators to explore industry–academia collaboration trends over time in the field of membrane use for water treatment. Technovation 25 (11):1273–80. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2004.06.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buznik, V. M., I. V. Zibareva, V. N. Plottukh-Peletskii, and N. I. Sorokin. 2004. Bibliometric Analysis of the Journal of Structural Chemistry. Journal of Structural Chemistry 45 (6):1096–106. doi:10.1007/s10947-005-0100-z.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cronin, B., D. Shaw, and K. La Barre. 2004. Visible, less visible, and invisible work: Patterns of collaboration in 20th century chemistry. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 55 (2):160–68. doi:10.1002/asi.10353.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dodson, D. 2020. Big in the big Ten: Highly cited works and their characteristics. Science and Technology Libraries 39 (4):353–68. doi:10.1080/0194262x.2020.1780539.
   Google Scholar
• Fan, L., L. Guo, X. Wang, L. Xu, and F. Liu. 2022. Does the author’s collaboration mode lead to papers’ different citation impacts? An empirical analysis based on propensity score matching. Journal of Informetrics 16 (4):101350. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2022.101350.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Figg, W. D., L. Dunn, D. J. Liewehr, S. M. Steinberg, P. W. Thurman, C. Barrett, and J. Birkinshaw. 2012. Scientific collaboration results in higher citation rates of published articles. Pharmacotherapy 26 (6):759–67. doi:10.1592/phco.26.6.759.
   Google Scholar
• Fortunato, S., C. T. Bergstrom, K. Börner, J. A. Evans, D. Helbing, S. Milojević, A. M. Petersen, F. Radicchi, R. Sinatra, B. Uzzi, et al. 2018. Science of science. Science: Advanced Materials and Devices 359 (6379):185. doi:10.1126/science.aao0185.
   Google Scholar
• Franceschet, M., and A. Costantini. 2010. The effect of scholar collaboration on impact and quality of academic papers. Journal of Informetrics 4 (4):540–53. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2010.06.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garfield, E. 1955. Citation indexes for science: A new dimension in documentation through association of ideas. Science: Advanced Materials and Devices 122 (3159):108–11. July 15, 1955. http://garfield.library.upenn.edu/essays/v6p468y1983.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Ghosh, J. S., and M. L. Neufeld. 1974. Uncitedness of articles in the Journal of the American Chemical Society. Inform Storage and Retrieval 10 (11–12):365–69. doi:10.1016/0020-0271(74)90043-6.
   Google Scholar
• Glänzel, W., K. Debackere, B. Thijs, and A. Schubert. 2006. A concise review on the role of author self-citations in information science, bibliometrics and science policy. Scientometrics 67 (2):263–77. doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0098-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glänzel, W., and C. De Lange. 2002. A distributional approach to multinationality measures of international scientific collaboration. Scientometrics 54 (1):75–89. doi:10.1023/A:10156684505035.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glänzel, W., and A. Schubert. 2001. Double effort=double impact? A critical view at international co-authorship in chemistry. Scientometrics 50 (2):199–214. doi:10.1023/A:1010561321723.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greene, M. 2007. The demise of the lone author. Nature 450 (7173):1165. doi:10.1038/4501165a.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gross, P. L. K., and E. M. Gross. 1927. College libraries and chemical education. Science. 66 (1713):385–89. doi:10.1126/science.66.1713.385.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• He, Z.-L., X.-S. Geng, and C. Campbell-Hunt. 2009. Research collaboration and research output: A longitudinal study of 65 biomedical scientists in a New Zealand university. Research Policy 38 (2):306–17. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2008.11.011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herbstein, F. H. 1993. Measuring ‘publications output’ and ‘publications impact’ of faculty members of a university chemistry department. Scientometrics 28 (3):349–73. doi:10.1007/BF02026515.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kato, M., and A. Ando. 2013. The relationship between research performance and international collaboration in chemistry. Scientometrics 97 (3):535–53. doi:10.1007/s11192-013-1011-y.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kennedy, D. 2003. Editorial: Multiple authors, multiple problems. Science: Advanced Materials and Devices 301 (5634):733. doi:10.1126/science.301.5634.733.
   Google Scholar
• Larivière, V., Y. Gingras, C. R. Sugimoto, and A. Tsou. 2015. Team size matters: Collaboration and scientific impact since 1900. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 66 (7):1323–32. doi:10.1002/asi.23266.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawani, S. M. 1986. Some bibliometric correlates of quality in scientific research. Scientometrics 9 (1–2):13–25. doi:10.1007/BF02016604.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marx, W. 2011. Special features of historical papers from the viewpoint of bibliometrics. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 62 (3):433–39. doi:10.1002/asi.21479.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merton, R. K. 1968. The matthew effect in science. Science: Advanced Materials and Devices 159 (3810):56–63. doi:10.1126/science.159.3810.56.
   Google Scholar
• Persson, O. 2010. Are highly cited papers more international? Scientometrics 83 (2):397–401. doi:10.1007/s11192-009-0007-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phillips, J. P. 1955. The individual in chemical research. Science: Advanced Materials and Devices 121 (3139):311–12. doi:10.1126/science.121.3139.311.c.
   Google Scholar
• Price, D. J. D. S. 1963. Little science, big science, 87–89. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Qin, J. 1994. An Investigation of Research Collaboration in the Sciences through the Philosophical Transactions 1901-1991. Scientometrics 29 (2):219–38. doi:10.1007/BF02017974.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rousseau, R. 2001. Are multi-authored articles cited more than single-authored ones? Are collaborations with authors from other countries more cited than collaborations within the country? A case study. In Proceedings of the Second Berlin Workshop on Scientometrics and Informetrics, ed. F. Havemann, R. Wagner-Döbler, and H. Kretschmer, 173–76. http://hdl.handle.net/1942/822.
   Google Scholar
• Rousseau, R., and J. Ding. 2016. Does international collaboration yield a higher citation potential for US scientists publishing in highly visible interdisciplinary journals? Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 67 (4):1009–13. doi:10.1002/asi.23565.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salisbury, L., J. J. Smith, and F. Faustin. 2022. Altmetric attention score and its relationships to the characteristics of the publications in the Journal of the American Chemical Society. Science & Technology Libraries 1–18. doi:10.1080/0194262X.2022.2099505.
   Google Scholar
• Smart, J. C., and A. E. Bayer. 1986. Author collaboration and impact: A note on citation rates of single and multiple authored articles. Scientometrics 10 (5–6):297–305. doi:10.1007/BF02016776.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stefaniak, B. 1982. Individual and multiple authorship of papers in chemistry and physics. Scientometrics 4 (4):331–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Subramanyam, K. 1983. Bibliometric studies of research collaboration: A review. Journal of Information Science 6 (1):35–42. doi:10.1177/016555158300600105.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sugimoto, C. R., N. Robinson-Garcia, D. S. Murray, A. Yegros-Yegros, R. Costas, and V. Larivière. 2017. Scientists have most impact when they’re free to move. Nature 550:29–31. doi:10.1038/550029a.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tahamtan, I., A. S. Afshar, and K. Ahamdzadeh. 2016. Factors affecting number of citations: A comprehensive review of the literature. Scientometrics 107 (3):1195–225. doi:10.1007/s11192-016-1889-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Noorden, R. 2017. The science that’s never been cited. Nature 552 (7684):162–64. doi:10.1038/d41586-017-08404-0.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Raan, A. F. J. 2005. Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods. Scientometrics 62 (1):133–43. doi:10.1007/s11192-005-0008-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Velez-Estevez, A., P. Garcia-Sanchez, J. A. Moral-Munoz, and M. J. Cobo. 2022. Why do papers from international collaborations get more citations? A bibliometric analysis of library and information science papers. Scientometrics 127 (12):7517–55. doi:10.1007/s11192-022-04486-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Visser, M., N. J. van Eck, and L. Waltman. 2021. Large-scale comparison of bibliographic data sources: Scopus, web of science, dimensions, crossref, and microsoft academic. Quantitative Science Studies 2 (1):20–41. doi:10.1162/qss_a_00112.
   Google Scholar
• Wagner, C. S., T. A. Whetsell, and L. Leydesdorff. 2017. Growth of international collaboration in science: Revisiting six specialties. Scientometrics 110 (3):1633–52. doi:10.1007/s11192-016-2230-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wuchty, S., B. F. Jones, and B. Uzi. 2007. The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science: Advanced Materials and Devices 316 (5827):1036–39. doi:10.1126/science.1136099.
   Google Scholar