Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-684899dbb8-ct24h Total loading time: 0.487 Render date: 2022-05-26T06:15:13.426Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true }

How Industrial-Organizational Psychology Can Benefit From Scientometrics (and Vice Versa)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 September 2018

Cornelius J. König*
Affiliation:
Fachrichtung Psychologie, Universität des Saarlandes
Nida ul Habib Bajwa
Affiliation:
Fachrichtung Psychologie, Universität des Saarlandes
Gabriel Schui
Affiliation:
Leibniz-Zentrum für Psychologische Information und Dokumentation
Clemens B. Fell
Affiliation:
Katholische Erwachsenenbildung im Kreis Saarlouis e. V.
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Cornelius König, Fachrichtung Psychologie, Universität des Saarlandes, Campus A 1 3, 66123 Saarbrücken, Germany. E-mail: ckoenig@mx.uni-saarland.de

Extract

Scientific fields benefit when their researchers engage in self-reflection. Accordingly, we welcome the evidence gathered by Gardner, Ryan, and Snoeyink (2018) on gender differences in our field, the field of industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology. In this commentary, we argue that such self-reflection processes can be further enhanced by taking advantage of the wealth and breadth of scientometrics, the quantitative study of science.

Type
Commentaries
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abramo, G., D'Angelo, C. A., & Di Costa, F. (2018). The effects of gender, age and academic rank on research diversification. Scientometrics, 114, 373387. doi: 10.1007/s11192-017-2529-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bornmann, L., Ye, A. Y., & Ye, F. Y. (2018). Identifying “hot papers” and papers with “delayed recognition” in large-scale datasets by using dynamically normalized citation impact scores. Scientometrics, 116, 655672. doi: 10.1007/s11192-018-2772-0CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, C. (2017). Science mapping: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2 (2), 140. doi: 10.1515/jdis-2017-0006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feingold, A. (1994). Gender differences in personality: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 429456. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.116.3.429CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fell, C. B., & König, C. J. (2016). Is there a gender difference in scientific collaboration? A scientometric examination of co-authorships among industrial–organizational psychologists. Scientometrics, 108, 113141. doi: 10.1007/s11192-016-1967-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, D. M., Ryan, A. M., & Snoeyink, M. (2018). How are we doing? An examination of gender representation in I-O psychology. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 11 (3), 369–388.Google Scholar
Gipp, B., & Beel, J. (2009). Citation proximity analysis (CPA): A new approach for identifying related work based on co-citation analysis. In Larsen, B. & Leta, J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics (pp. 571575). Leuven, Belgium: International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics.Google Scholar
König, C. J., & Bajwa, N. u. H. (2018). How international is research in industrial/organizational psychology? A large empirical investigation. Paper submitted for publication.Google Scholar
König, C. J., Fell, C. B., Kellnhofer, L., & Schui, G. (2015). Are there gender differences among researchers from industrial/organizational psychology? Scientometrics, 105, 19311952. doi: 10.1007/s11192-015-1646-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krampen, G. (2016). Scientometric trend analyses of publications on the history of psychology: Is psychology becoming an unhistorical science? Scientometrics, 106, 12171238. doi: 10.1007/s11192-016-1834-4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Larivière, V., Ni, C., Gingras, Y., Cronin, B., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2013). Global gender disparities in science. Nature, 504, 211213. doi: 10.1038/504211aCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ni, P., & An, X. (2018). Relationship between international collaboration papers and their citations from an economic perspective. Scientometrics, 116, 863877. doi: 10.1007/s11192-018-2784-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ortega, J. L. (2017). Are peer-review activities related to reviewer bibliometric performance? A scientometric analysis of Publons. Scientometrics, 112, 947962. doi: 10.1007/s11192-017-2399-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poon, W. C., & Leeves, G. D. (2017). Is there gender gap unequivocally? Evidence from research output 1958–2008. Scientometrics, 111, 16871701. doi: 10.1007/s11192-017-2327-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qiu, J., Zhao, R., Yang, S., & Dong, K. (2017). Informetrics: Theory, methods and applications. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberson, Q., Ryan, A. M., & Ragins, B. R. (2017). The evolution and future of diversity at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102, 483499. doi: 10.1037/apl0000161CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sandnes, F. E. (2018). Do Norwegian academics who publish more earn higher salaries? Scientometrics, 115, 263281. doi: 10.1007/s11192-018-2639-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sullivan, S. E., & Baruch, Y. (2009). Advances in career theory and research: A critical review and agenda for future exploration. Journal of Management, 35, 15421571. doi: 10.1177/0149206309350082CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thelwall, M. (2016). Web indicators for research evaluation: A practical guide. San Rafael, CA: Morgan & Claypool.Google Scholar

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

How Industrial-Organizational Psychology Can Benefit From Scientometrics (and Vice Versa)
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

How Industrial-Organizational Psychology Can Benefit From Scientometrics (and Vice Versa)
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

How Industrial-Organizational Psychology Can Benefit From Scientometrics (and Vice Versa)
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *