How to calculate the practical significance of citation impact differences? An empirical example from evaluative institutional bibliometrics using adjusted predictions and marginal effects

被引:58
作者
Bornmann, Lutz [1 ]
Williams, Richard [2 ]
机构
[1] Adm Headquarters Max Planck Soc, Div Sci & Innovat Studies, D-80539 Munich, Germany
[2] Univ Notre Dame, Dept Sociol, Notre Dame, IN 46556 USA
关键词
Evaluative bibliometrics; Practical significance; Highly-cited papers; Average adjusted predictions; Average marginal effects; Adjusted predictions at representative values; Marginal effects at representative values; PERCENTILE RANK CLASSES; JOURNAL IMPACT;
D O I
10.1016/j.joi.2013.02.005
中图分类号
TP39 [计算机的应用];
学科分类号
081203 ; 0835 ;
摘要
Evaluative bibliometrics is concerned with comparing research units by using statistical procedures. According to Williams (2012) an empirical study should be concerned with the substantive and practical significance of the findings as well as the sign and statistical significance of effects. In this study we will explain what adjusted predictions and marginal effects are and how useful they are for institutional evaluative bibliometrics. As an illustration, we will calculate a regression model using publications (and citation data) produced by four universities in German-speaking countries from 1980 to 2010. We will show how these predictions and effects can be estimated and plotted, and how this makes it far easier to get a practical feel for the substantive meaning of results in evaluative bibliometric studies. An added benefit of this approach is that it makes it far easier to explain results obtained via sophisticated statistical techniques to a broader and sometimes non-technical audience. We will focus particularly on Average Adjusted Predictions (AAPs), Average Marginal Effects (AMEs), Adjusted Predictions at Representative Values (APRVs) and Marginal Effects at Representative Values (MERVs). (c) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:562 / 574
页数:13
相关论文
共 26 条