The scientific writing of the Portuguese Science: Some metrics from the social sciences and psychology
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17575/psicologia.v35i1.1628Keywords:
Scientific Publication, Epistemology, Scientific Writing, PsychologyAbstract
In this work we try to know the ways in which the portuguese science writing, mainly the national social science and psychological writing, appears in the biggest scientific databases of the world. To reach that aim we research the national scientific production using PorData; Scimago; Scopus; Web of Science and the Journal of Citation Report. We wanted to know the kind of scores use to evaluate the scientific impact; the authorships patterns; the paper’s main themes; the presence of national scientific journal in the international arena. Finally, we wanted to identify other metrics that started to show up.
Downloads
References
Adie, E., & Roe, W. (2013). Altmetric: enriching scholarly content with article‐level discussion and metrics. Learned Publishing, 26(1), 11-17. https://doi.org/10.1087/20130103
Altbach, P. (2015). The tyranny of citations. International Higher Education, 43, 3-5. https://doi.org/10.6017/ihe.2006.43.7889
Analytics, C. (2019, Março 28). Web of science core collection. Citation database. Web of Science. https://clarivate.com/webofsciencegroup/solutions/web-of-science-core-collection
Analytics, C. (2019b, Março 28). Journal Citation Reports (JCR). https://clarivate.com/webofsciencegroup/solutions/journal-citation-reports
Billig, M. (2013). Academic words and academic capitalism. Athenea digital: Revista de pensamiento e investigación social, 13, 1, 7-12. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/athenead/v13n1.1108
Buschman, M., & Michalek, A. (2013). Are alternative metrics still alternative? Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 39(4), 35-39. https://doi.org/10.1002/bult.2013.1720390411
Caparrós, J. (1980). Los paradigmas en psicologia. CEAC.
Falagas, M. E., Pitsouni, E. I., Malietzis, G. A., & Pappas, G. (2008). Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, web of science, and Google scholar: strengths and weaknesses. The FASEB Journal, 22(2), 338-342. https://doi.org/10.1096/fj.07-9492LSF
Fernandes, L. (2017). A produção do saber psicológico na sociedade do conhecimento: breve reflexão sobre liberdades e constrangimentos. In L. Fernandes (ed.), Conhecimento de si na sociedade do conhecimento (1ª ed, pp. 21-52). Apuro Edições.
Haro, F. A. D. (2017). O impacto de (não) ter impacto: para uma sociologia crítica das publicações científicas. Revista Crítica de Ciências Sociais, 113, 83-106. http://dx.doi.org/10.4000/rccs.6659
Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L., De Rijcke, S., & Rafols, I. (2015). Bibliometrics: the Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature News, 520(7548), 429. https://doi.org/10.1038/520429a
Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National academy of Sciences, 102(46), 16569-16572. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102
Larsen-Dahler, P. (2019, Março 30). Ambiguidades e distorções das novas diretrizes acadêmicas. Café História – história feita com cliques. https://www.cafehistoria.com.br/regras-e-ambiguidades
Martínez, M., & Tarrès, J. (2013). La fábrica de conocimientos: in/corporación del capitalismo cognitivo en el contexto universitário. Athenea Digital, 13(1), 139-154. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/athenead/v13n1.1031
Melero, R. (2015). Altmetrics – a complement to conventional metrics. Biochemia Medica, 25(2), 152-160. https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2015.016
Morin, E. (1990). Introdução ao Pensamento Complexo. Instituto Piaget.
Pordata. (2019, Março 14). Pordata–Base de dados Portugal Contemporâneo. http://www.pordata.pt
SCImago (2019, Março 01). Journal and Country Rank. SCImago Research Group. http://www.scimagojr.com
SCOPUS, F. B. E. (2019, Março 7). Scopus. https://www.scopus.com
Tinoco, R (2013). A citação científica como arma simbólica. Revista Nova Águia, 9(1), 194-195.
