Advanced search in Research products
Research products
arrow_drop_down
Searching FieldsTerms
Any field
arrow_drop_down
includes
arrow_drop_down
Include:
The following results are related to Digital Humanities and Cultural Heritage. Are you interested to view more results? Visit OpenAIRE - Explore.
2 Research products, page 1 of 1

  • Digital Humanities and Cultural Heritage
  • Publications
  • Research data
  • Other research products
  • 2017-2021
  • 050905 science studies
  • IT
  • EU
  • Scientometrics
  • Social Science and Humanities

Date (most recent)
arrow_drop_down
  • Open Access English
    Authors: 
    Camil Demetrescu; Andrea Ribichini; Marco Schaerf;
    Publisher: Springer Verlag
    Country: Italy
    Project: EC | SecondHands (643950)

    We investigate the accuracy of how author names are reported in bibliographic records excerpted from four prominent sources: WoS, Scopus, PubMed, and CrossRef. We take as a case study 44,549 publications stored in the internal database of Sapienza University of Rome, one of the largest universities in Europe. While our results indicate generally good accuracy for all bibliographic data sources considered, we highlight a number of issues that undermine the accuracy for certain classes of author names, including compound names and names with diacritics, which are common features to Italian and other Western languages.

  • Open Access English
    Authors: 
    Niccolò Casnici; Francisco Grimaldo; Nigel Gilbert; Pierpaolo Dondio; Flaminio Squazzoni;
    Publisher: Springer Nature
    Countries: Ireland, Italy

    This paper investigates the fate of manuscripts that were rejected from JASSS-The Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, the flagship journal of social simulation. We tracked 456 manuscripts that were rejected from 1997 to 2011 and traced their subsequent publication as journal articles, conference papers or working papers. We compared the impact factor of the publishing journal and the citations of those manuscripts that were eventually published against the yearly impact factor of JASSS and the number of citations achieved by the JASSS mean and top cited articles. Only 10% of the rejected manuscripts were eventually published in a journal that was indexed in the Web of Science, although most of the rejected manuscripts were published elsewhere. Being exposed to more than one round of reviews before rejection, having received a more detailed reviewer report and being subjected to higher inter-reviewer disagreement were all associated with the number of citations received when the manuscript was eventually published. This indicates that peer review could contribute to increasing the quality even of rejected manuscripts.