Whole Counting Vs. Whole-Normalized Counting: A Country Level Comparative Study of Internationally Collaborated Papers on Tribology

B Elango, P Rajendran

Abstract


The purpose of this study is to compare the changing behaviour of two counting methods (whole counting and whole-normalized counting) and inflation rate at country level research productivity and impact.  For this, publication data on tribology research published between 1998 and 2012 from SCOPUS has been used. Only internationally collaborated papers are considered for comparison between two counting methods.  The result of correlation tests shows that there is a high correlation in all the four indicators between the two counting methods.  However, the result of t-test shows that there is significant difference in the three indicators (paper count, citation count and h-index) between the two counting methods. This study concludes that whole-normalized counting (fractional) is the better choice for publication and citations counting at the country level assessment.


Full Text:

PDF

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Copyright (c) 2017 International Journal of Information Dissemination and Technology

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.