Abstract
We explain how to determine automatically the e-mail address of the corresponding author in a Web of Science record. Next, we distinguish two types of e-mails used by corresponding authors of academic papers: institutional e-mails and non-institutional ones. We investigate differences between papers with an institutional e-mail address and those with a non-institutional one. It is found that, on average, papers with an institutional e-mail address receive more citations than other ones.
References
Huang, S. Q., Yang, B., Yan, S. L., & Rousseau, R. (2014). Institution name disambiguation for research assessment. Scientometrics, 99(3), 823–838.
Normile, D. (2017). China cracks down on fraud. Science, 357(6350), 435.
Scimago. (2016). Scimago Journal & Country Rank 1996–2016. http://www.scimagojr.com/countryrank.php.
Stigbrand, T. (2017). Retraction note to multiple articles in Tumor Biology. Tumor Biology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13277-017-5487-6.
Yang, B., Rousseau, R., Huang, S. Q., & Yan, S. L. (2015). Do first rate scientists work at first rate organizations? Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, 20(1), 47–60.
Acknowledgements
We are very grateful to our graduate students who carefully labelled publications based on e-mails, collected data and helped with the calculations. Research of Si Shen and Dongbo Wang is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Number: 71503124). We thank two anonymous reviewers for helpful observations and suggestions.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
In this appendix we provide data about citations/publication for the countries studied in this article. Although the types of documents and the period of publications correspond, for practical reasons the databases do not. Hence, the reader should not pay too much attention to this data. It just serves to operationalize the phrase “rather low number of citations per publication” as used with respect to the Russian Federation, China and India. Just for the readers’ information we mention that the Pearson correlation between the ratio of institutional e-mail address and the non-institutional ones (column 2 of Table 8) and the number of citations per publication (column 3 of Table 8) is 0.82, while the Spearman rank correlation is 0.77.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Shen, S., Rousseau, R. & Wang, D. Do papers with an institutional e-mail address receive more citations than those with a non-institutional one?. Scientometrics 115, 1039–1050 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2691-0
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2691-0