Search results

This review paper aims to explore and investigate the Quality 4.0 current knowledge, emerging areas, and trends available in the literature and provide insights for future research directions. The bibliometric analysis determines the most prominent journals, authors, countries, articles, and themes. The Citation and PageRank analysis identifies the most influential and prestigious articles. The author's keyword analysis identifies the research theme, patterns, and trends within a particular area of research.

This study utilised the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis) declaration as a review protocol, and the data is retrieved accordingly. Therefore, 104 articles from Scopus and 28 from Web of Science were combined in R-Environment, and 25 duplicates were removed using RStudio. Finally, 107 papers were selected for further analysis. After the abstract level screening, the study reviewed 99 articles bibliographically published in peer-reviewed journals from prominent academic databases Scopus and WoS between 2011 to April 2023. We used the VOSviewer software tool for analysing bibliometric networks that allow the construction, visualisation, and exploration of maps based on any form of network data.

The review identified emerging themes: artificial intelligence, digitalization, sustainability, root cause analysis, topic modelling, and digital voice-of-customers. To establish the intellectual structure of the field and identify gaps, co-citation and content analysis were used. The content of 49 papers in the identified clusters was then carefully analysed. The four primary themes are the relationship of Quality 4.0 with Industry 4.0, the conceptualization of Quality 4.0, recommendations for the new Quality 4.0 model, and the impact of Quality 4.0. The findings provide an excellent foundation for future research in this field for policymakers, managers, practitioners, and academia.

This is the first systematic literature review-cum-bibliometric analysis on quality 4.0 that covers the field comprehensively. Based on the present review, the paper proposes six possible future research directions to investigate.

Selected volumes of the Pakistan Development Review (PDR) and the Pakistan Economic and Social Review (PESR) were analysed to find the citation pattern of their articles. Eight volumes of each journal were selected, two volumes representing a decade. The results revealed that the PDR has been the most cited journal. The mean score of citations per article remained insignificantly different in the two core journals. More than 50 per cent of the citations from both journals were single‐authored. More than 50 per cent of the citations were from non‐journal sources, mainly books. Although citations from online sources were seen, it was a negligible number. About 47 per cent of the total citations of the PDR were up to five years old compared with the citations of the PESR, where only 25 per cent fell into this category. Most of the authors used foreign books as citations. There is a significant similarity in the top most cited journals in both cases. Most of the frequently cited journals were from the USA.

This paper aims to examine the “impact” of three leading international auditing journals via citation analysis.

A Google Scholar citation analysis was conducted for the period 2001‐2006 for Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, Managerial Auditing Journal, and International Journal of Auditing. The top ten citations from each of these journals were used to analyze relative journal citation frequency, publication topics, and leading authors.

Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory has a statistically significant higher level of average number of citations than the other two journals in this paper. Nine topics accounted for 80 percent of the articles examined. Four individuals are author/co‐author of two papers and three of these individuals published in two of the three journals.

This is the first paper to examine recent citations from these three journals. The research provides a basis for an author to evaluate potential “impact” from a research submission to these three journals.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate course instructor perceptions into personal and classroom use of computer‐generated bibliographic citations. The paper aims to provide guidance as librarians promote and teach automated citation services to the academic communities.

Course instructors at one university completed a quantitative survey about computer‐generated bibliographic citations. Questions focused on instructor use of automated citation services, if they generally reduce grades for bibliographic errors, if they would reduce grades for specific computer‐generated citation (CGC) errors, and would they advise students to use automated citation services at various course levels.

The results show a majority of course instructors do not use CGCs for their own research or promote the citation services in the classroom. A majority of respondents generally reduce student grades for bibliographic errors and would continue to do so for CGC errors. The data show specific types of automatically generated citation errors are more detrimental to student grades than others. Furthermore, results indicate course level impacts instructor promotion of CGCs.

The results provide librarians with helpful data, from the course instructor perspective, as they promote and teach computer‐generated bibliographic citations.

Literature on computer‐generated bibliographic citations tends to focus on technical and comparative aspects of citation services, or users' product opinions. This paper explores course instructor use, course promotion, and bibliographic grading of automatically generated citations to enhance advocacy and instruction of these services.

A citation study was carried out on all 217 academics who teach in UK library and information science schools. These authors between them received 622 citations in Social Scisearch for articles they had published between 1988 and the present. The results were ranked by department, and compared to the ratings awarded to the departments in the 1992 Universities Funding Council Research Assessment Exercise. Using the Spearman Rank Order Correlation coefficient, it was found that there is a statistically significant correlation between the numbers of citations received by a department in total, or the average number of citations received in the department per academic, and the Research Assessment Exercise rating. The paper concludes that this provides further independent support for the validity of citation counting, even when using just the first authors as a search tool for cited references. The paper also concludes that the cost and effort of the Research Assessment Exercise may not be justified when a simpler and cheaper alternative, namely a citation counting exercise, could be undertaken. The paper also concludes that the University of North London would probably have benefitted from being included in the 1992 Research Assessment Exercise.

Conference publications are an important aspect of research activities. There are generally both oral presentations and poster sessions at large international conferences. One can hypothesise that, for the same conferences, the papers presented in oral sessions should have a higher research impact than the papers presented in poster sessions. However, there has been no related study examining the validity of this hypothesis. In other words, the difference of research impact between papers presented orally or during poster sessions has not been discussed in literature. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to conduct a citation analysis to compare the research impact of papers presented in oral and poster sessions.

In this paper, data from three leading conferences in the field of computer vision are examined, namely CVPR (2011 and 2012), ICCV (2011) and ECCV (2012). Several types of citation-related statistics are collected, including the number of highly cited papers (i.e. high number of citations) presented in oral and poster sessions, the total citations of both types of papers, the average citations of oral and poster papers, and the average citations of each frequently cited paper of both types.

There are three main findings. First, a larger proportion of highly cited papers are from oral sessions than poster sessions. Second, the average number of citations per paper is larger for those presented in oral sessions than poster sessions. Third, the average number of citations for highly cited papers presented in oral sessions is not necessarily greater than for the ones presented in poster sessions.

The originality of this paper is that it is the first attempt to examine the differences of citation impacts of conference papers presented in oral and poster sessions. The findings of this study will allow future bibliometrics research to further explore this related issue for longer periods and different fields.

The Taiwan Humanities Citation Index (THCI) is Taiwan's effort to construct a search, research, and evaluation tool for research in the arts and humanities. This article describes the design, framework, features, and policies and rules of the THCI. Citation analysis has been regarded as a systematic way to investigate research developments and trends. Since the Arts & Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI) indexes mostly English journals, the THCI could become an auxiliary citation index of the A&HCI for Taiwanese researchers.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze citation behaviors of students in the LIS field among a variety of local universities in Tehran.

A total of 259 MA dissertations in Library and Information Science submitted to five universities in Tehran during 2003‐2008 are examined. These universities were selected based on their location and the authors' accessibility to their university libraries. Overall, five out of nine universities in Iran which have Masters Courses in Library and Information Science were selected for this study. The data were gathered using a checklist by the author, who personally attended in university libraries and counted all dissertation references.

The study shows that students' citation behaviors are in favor of books, and Farsi e‐sources are lesser used by LIS students than English e‐sources. The total number of book citations is far more than total number of other formats. While this study could be useful in library acquisition decisions, it could also inform in areas related to issues students face in finding suitable pieces of information.

This study would be useful for educational and acquisition purposes in university libraries, since it examines citation behavior of students through a specific discipline.

The study deals with MA Library and Information Science dissertations among all universities of Tehran that teach LIS masters courses.

The purpose of this conceptual paper is to present a simple, novel method for excluding self‐citation from h‐index values – the b‐index.

The work described assumes that relative self‐citation rate is constant across an author's publications and that the citation profile of a set of papers follows a Zipfian distribution, and from this derives a simple mathematical expression for excluding self‐citation from h‐index values.

It is shown that this new index is simply equal to the integer value of the author's external citation rate (non‐self‐citations) to the power three quarters, multiplied by their h‐index. This value, called the b‐index, does not require an extensive analysis of the self‐citation rates of individual papers to produce, and appropriately shows the biggest numerical decreases, as compared to the corresponding h‐index, for very high self‐citers.

The method presented allows the user to assess quickly and simply the effects of self‐citation on an author's h‐index.

This paper provides a simple and novel method for excluding self‐citation from the h‐index and should be of interest to those interested in bibliometrics and databases of scientific literature.

Bibliometric analysis of research reports in continuing medical education that were evaluated for their methodological quality is used to assess the relation between methodological rigour and citation frequency. There is a positive, significant but low correlation between rigour and citation, and evidence that rigorous work will be cited independent of where the article is published. There is no strong evidence that study design is correlated with subsequent citation. Of the five methodological standards used in the bibliography, outcome measure is the best predictor of citation frequency. In certain cases citation measures might be used as guides to or indicators of methodologically rigorous research reports.