Bibliometrics has changed out of all recognition since 1958; becoming established as a field, being taught widely in library and information science schools, and being at the core of a number of science evaluation research groups around the world. This was all made possible by the work of Eugene Garfield and his Science Citation Index. This article reviews the distance that bibliometrics has travelled since 1958 by comparing early bibliometrics with current practice, and by giving an overview of a range of recent developments, such as patent analysis, national research evaluation exercises, visualization techniques, new applications, online citation indexes, and the creation of digital libraries. Webometrics, a modern, fast-growing offshoot of bibliometrics, is reviewed in detail. Finally, future prospects are discussed with regard to both bibliometrics and webometrics.
B. Thackray and H.B. Brock, Eugene Garfield: history, scientific information and chemical endeavour. In: B. Cronin and H.B. Atkins (eds) The Web of Knowledge: a Festschrift in Honor of Eugene Garfield ( Information Today, Medford, NJ, 2000) 11-23. [ASIS Monograph Series]
2.
E. Garfield , Citation Indexing: Its Theory and Applications in Science, Technology and the Humanities (Wiley Interscience, New York, 1979).
3.
R.K. Merton , The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1973).
4.
C.L. Borgman and J. Furner, Scholarly communication and bibliometrics , Annual Review of Information Science and Technology36 (2002) 3-72.
5.
G.K. Zipf, Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort: an Introduction to Human Ecology (Addison-Wesley, Cambridge, MA, 1949)
6.
H.F. Moed, Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation (Information Science and Knowledge Management) (Springer, New York , 2005).
7.
L. Leydesdorff , Why words and co-words cannot map the development of the sciences. Journal of the American Society for Information Science48(5) (1997) 418-27.
8.
S.C. Bradford , Sources of information on specific subjects . Engineering: an Illustrated Weekly Journal137(26 January) (1934) 85-6.
9.
C. Oppenheim and S. Renn, Highly cited old papers and the reasons why they continue to be cited, Journal of the American Society for Information Science29(5) (1978) 225-31.
10.
B. Cronin, The Citation Process: the Role and Significance of Citations in Scientific Communication (Taylor Graham, London , 1984).
11.
D. de SollaPrice, A general theory of bibliometric and other cumulative advantage processes, Journal of the American Society for Information Science27(4) (1976) 292-306.
12.
R.K. Merton , The Matthew effect in science, Science159(3810) (1968) 56-63.
13.
E. Garfield , Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation , Science178(4060) (1972) 471-9.
14.
E. Garfield , The Agony and the Ecstasy: the History and the Meaning of the Journal Impact Factor (2005). Paper presented at the Fifth International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication, in Chicago, USA, 2005. Available at: http://garfield.library.upenn.edu/papers/jifchicago2005.pdf (accessed 27 September 2007)
15.
S.J. Bensman , Garfield and the impact factor, Annual Review of Information Science and Technology41 (2007) 93-155.
16.
A. Cawkell, Visualizing citation connections. In: B. Cronin and H.B. Atkins (eds) The Web of Knowledge: a Festschrift in Honor of Eugene Garfield ( Information Today, Medford, NJ , 2000) 177-94. [ASIS Monograph Series]
17.
H. Small , Co-citation in the scientific literature: a new measure of the relationship between two documents, Journal of the American Society for Information Science24(4) (1973) 265-9.
18.
I.V. Marshakova , System of document connections based on references , Nauchno-Teknicheskaia Informatsiia2(1) (1973) 3-8.
19.
H.D. White and B.C. Griffith, Author co-citation: a literature measure of intellectual structure , Journal of the American Society for Information Science32(3) ( 1982) 163-72.
20.
H.D. White, Pathfinder networks and author cocitation analysis: a remapping of paradigmatic information scientists, Journal of the American Society for Information Science54(5) (2003) 423-34.
21.
J. Nicolaisen , Citation analysis, Annual Review of Information Science and Technology41 (2007) 609-41.
22.
J.E. Hirsch , An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences102(46) ( 2005) 16569-72.
23.
C. Oppenheim , Using the h-index to rank influential British researchers in information science and librarianship, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology58(2) (2007) 297-301.
24.
B. Cronin and L.I. Meho, Using the h-index to rank influential information scientists, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology57(9) (2006) 1275-8.
25.
S. Harnad, Open access scientometrics and the UK Research Assessment Exercise . In: D. Torres-Salinas and H.F. Moed (eds) Proceedings of 11th Annual Meeting of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics ( CINDOC, Madrid, Spain, 2007) 27-33.
26.
V. Bence and C. Oppenheim, The influence of peer review on the Research Assessment Exercise, Journal of Information Science30(4) ( 2004) 347-68.
27.
Tertiary Education Commission, Performance-Based Research Fund - a Guideline for 2003 ( 2003 ). Available at: www.tec.govt.nz/upload/downloads/pbrffinal-july03.pdf (accessed 7 September 2007).
28.
Dest, Institutional Grants Scheme (n.d.) Available at: www.dest.gov.au/sectors/higher_education/programmes_funding/general_funding/operating_grants/institutional_grants_scheme.htm (accessed 12 September 2007).
29.
S.E. Cozzens , Assessing federally-supported academic research in the United States, Research Evaluation9(1) (2000) 5-10.
30.
B. van der Meulen and A. Rip , Evaluation of societal quality of public sector research in the Netherlands, Research Evaluation9(1) (2000) 11-25.
31.
M. Pienaar et al., The South African system of evaluating and rating individual researchers: its merits, shortcomings, impact and future , Research Evaluation9(1) (2000) 27-36.
32.
A. Silvani , G. Sirilli and F. Tuzi, R&D evaluation in Italy: more needs to be done, Research Evaluation14(3) (2005) 207-15.
33.
L. Butler , Explaining Australia's increased share of ISI publications - the effects of a funding formula based on publication counts , Research Policy32(1) (2003) 143-55.
34.
J. Adams , Research assessment in the UK, Science296(5569) (2002) 805.
35.
L.I. Meho and K. Yang, Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of Science vs. Scopus and Google Scholar , Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology58(13) (2007) 2105-25.
36.
M. Norris and C. Oppenheim, Comparing alternatives to the Web of Science for coverage of the social sciences literature, Journal of Informetrics1(1) (2007) 161-9.
37.
K. Kousha and M. Thelwall, Google Scholar citations and Google Web/URL citations: a multi-discipline exploratory analysis, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology58(7) ( 2007) 1055-65.
38.
P. Jacsó , Google Scholar: the pros and the cons, Online Information Review29(2) (2005) 208-14.
39.
C. Chen, Information Visualization: Beyond the Horizon, 2nd Edition ( Springer, New York, 2004).
40.
H. Small , Visualising science through citation mapping , Journal of American Society for Information Science50(9) (1999) 799-813.
41.
K. Boyack, Using detailed maps of science to identify potential collaborations . In: D. Torres-Salinas and H.F. Moed (eds), Proceedings of ISSI 2007 Volume 1 ( CSIC, Madrid, 2007) 124-35.
42.
L. Leydesdorff , Betweenness centrality as an indicator of the interdisciplinarity of scientific journals, Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology58(9) (2007) 1303-19.
43.
C. Chen, CiteSpace II: detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology57(3) (2006) 359-77.
44.
M. Gibbons et al., The New Production of Knowledge (Sage, London, 1994).
45.
M. Meyer , Academic patents as an indicator of useful research? A new approach to measure academic inventiveness, Research Evaluation12(1) (2003) 17-27.
46.
C. Oppenheim , Do patent citations count? In: B. Cronin and H.B. Atkins (eds) The Web of Knowledge: a Festschrift in Honor of Eugene Garfield (Information Today, Medford, NJ, 2000) 405-32. [ASIS Monograph Series]
47.
L. Leydesdorff , The university-industry knowledge relationship: analyzing patents and the science base of technologies, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology54(11) (2004) 991-1001.
48.
H.-R. Ke et al., Exploring behavior of e-journal users in science and technology: transaction log analysis of Elsevier's ScienceDirect OnSite in Taiwan, Library & Information Science Research24(3) ( 2002) 265-91.
49.
K. Marek and E.J. Valauskas, Web logs as indices of electronic journal use: tools for identifying a `classic' article, Libri52(4) (2002) 220-30.
50.
M.J. Kurtz et al., The bibliometric properties of article readership information , Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology56(2) (2005) 111-28.
51.
S. Jones et al., A transaction log analysis of a digital library, International Journal on Digital Libraries3(2) (2000) 152-69.
52.
P. Huntington , D. Nicholas and H.R. Jamali, Site navigation and its impact on content viewed by the virtual scholar: a deep log analysis, Journal of Information Science33(5) (2007) 598-610.
53.
P.M. Davis and M.J. Fromerth, Does the arXiv lead to higher citations and reduced publisher downloads for mathematics articles? Scientometrics71(2) (2007) 203-15.
54.
T.S. Brody , S. Harnad and L. Carr, Earlier web usage statistics as predictors of later citation impact, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology57(8) (2006) 1060-72.
55.
L. Björneborn and P. Ingwersen, Toward a basic framework for webometrics , Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology55(14) (2004) 1216-27.
56.
T.C. Almind and P. Ingwersen, Informetric analyses on the World Wide Web: methodological approaches to `Webometrics', Journal of Documentation53(4) (1997) 404-26.
57.
P. Mayr and F. Tosques, Google Web APIs: an Instrument for Webometric Analyses? ( 2005 ) Available at: www.ib.hu-berlin.de/%7Emayr/arbeiten/ISSI2005_Mayr_Toques.pdf (accessed 7 January 2008).
58.
I.F. Aguillo et al., Scientific research activity and communication measured with cybermetrics indicators, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology57(10) (2006) 1296-1302.
59.
P. Ingwersen , The calculation of Web Impact Factors, Journal of Documentation54(2) (1998) 236-43.
60.
B. Cronin , Bibliometrics and beyond: some thoughts on web-based citation analysis, Journal of Information Science27(1) ( 2001) 1-7.
61.
M. Thelwall , Extracting macroscopic information from web links, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology52(13) (2001) 1157-68.
62.
O. Thomas and P. Willet, Webometric analysis of departments of librarianship and information science, Journal of Information Science26(6) (2000) 421-8.
63.
F. Barjak and M. Thelwall, A statistical analysis of the web presences of European life sciences research teams, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology59(4) (2008) 628-43.
64.
F. Barjak , X. Li and M. Thelwall, Which factors explain the web impact of scientists' personal home pages? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology58(2) (2007) 200-211.
65.
M. Thelwall and G. Harries, Do better scholars' Web publications have significantly higher online impact? Journal of American Society for Information Science and Technology55(2) (2004) 149-59.
66.
M. Thelwall , Link Analysis: an Information Science Approach (Academic Press, San Diego, 2004).
67.
G. Heimeriks , M. Hörlesberger and P. van den Besselaar, Mapping communication and collaboration in heterogeneous research networks, Scientometrics58(2) (2003) 391-413.
68.
G. Harries et al., Hyperlinks as a data source for science mapping, Journal of Information Science30(5) (2004) 436-47.
69.
X. Li et al., National and international university departmental web site interlinking, part 2: link patterns, Scientometrics64(2) (2005) 187-208.
70.
N. Payne and M. Thelwall, A longitudinal study of academic webs: growth and stabilisation, Scientometrics71(3) (2007) 523-39.
71.
N. Payne, A Longitudinal Study of Academic Web Links: Identifying and Explaining Change (University of Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton, 2007)
72.
L. Vaughan and D. Shaw, Bibliographic and web citations: what is the difference? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology54(14) (2003) 1313-22.
73.
L. Vaughan and D. Shaw, Web citation data for impact assessment: a comparison of four science disciplines, Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology56(10) (2005) 1075-87.
74.
K. Kousha and M. Thelwall, Motivations for URL citations to open access library and information science articles, Scientometrics68(3) (2006) 501-17.
75.
J.Bar-Ilan, The use of Web search engines in information science research. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology38 (2004) 231-88.
76.
S. Lawrence and C.L. Giles, Accessibility of information on the web , Nature400(6740) (1999) 107-9.
77.
L. Introna and H. Nissenbaum, Shaping the web: why the politics of search engines matters, The Information Society16(3) (2000) 1-17.
78.
E. Van Couvering , New media? The political economy of Internet search engines. In: Annual Conference of the International Association of Media & Communications Researchers ( Porto Alegre, Brazil, 2004). Available at: http://personal.lse.ac.uk/vancouve/IAMCR-CTP_SearchEnginePoliticalEconomy_EVC_2004-07-14.pdf (accessed 7 January 2008).
79.
L. Vaughan and M. Thelwall, Search engine coverage bias: evidence and possible causes, Information Processing and Management40(4) (2004) 693-707.
80.
J. Bar-Ilan and B.C. Peritz, Evolution, continuity, and disappearance of documents on a specific topic on the Web: a longitudinal study of `informetrics' , Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology55(11) (2004) 980 -90.
81.
M. Thelwall , Extracting accurate and complete results from search engines: case study Windows Live, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology59(1) (2008) 38-50. Available at: www.scit.wlv.ac.uk/%7Ecm1993/papers/2007_Accurate_Complete_preprint.doc (accessed 22 May 2007).
82.
H.W. Snyder and H. Rosenbaum, Can search engines be used for Web-link analysis? A critical review, Journal of Documentation55(4) ( 1999) 375-84.
83.
J. Bar-Ilan , Search engine results over time - a case study on search engine stability, Cybermetrics (1999). Available at: www.cindoc.csic.es/cybermetrics/articles/v2i1p1.html (accessed 7 January 2008).
84.
W. Mettrop and P. Nieuwenhuysen, Internet search engines - fluctuations in document accessibility, Journal of Documentation57(5) ( 2001) 623-51.
85.
R. Rousseau , Daily time series of common single word searches in AltaVista and NorthernLight, Cybermetrics2/3 (1999). Available at: www.cindoc.csic.es/cybermetrics/articles/v2i1p2.html (accessed 25 July 2006).
86.
A.G. Smith, Does metadata count? A Webometric investigation. In: M. Tegelaars (ed.), Proceedings of DC-2002 , Florence, 14-17 October 2002 (Firenze University Press, Firenze, 2002) 133-8.
87.
T. Craven , Variations in use of meta tag keywords by web pages in different languages, Journal of Information Science30(3) ( 2004) 268-79.
88.
A. Broder et al., Graph structure in the web, Journal of Computer Networks33(1/6) (2000) 309-20.
89.
L. Björneborn , Small-world link structures across an academic web space - a library and information science approach. PhD thesis, Department of Information Studies (Royal School of Library and Information Science, Copenhagen , Denmark, 2004).
90.
L. Björneborn , `Mini small worlds' of shortest link paths crossing domain boundaries in an academic Web space, Scientometrics68(3) ( 2006) 395-414.
91.
A.L. Barabási and R. Albert, Emergence of scaling in random networks , Science286(5439) (1999) 509-12.
92.
S. Brin and L. Page, The anatomy of a large scale hypertextual Web search engine, Computer Networks and ISDN Systems30(1/7) ( 1998) 107-17.
93.
D. Pennock et al., Winners don't take all: characterizing the competition for links on the web, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences99(8) (2002) 5207-11.
94.
W. Koehler , A longitudinal study of Web pages continued: a report after six years, Information Research9(2). Available at: http://informationr.net/ir/9-2/paper174.html (accessed 20 September 2007).
95.
J.L. Ortega , I. Aguillo and J.A. Prieto, Longitudinal study of content and elements in the scientific web environment, Journal of Information Science32(4) (2006) 344-51.
96.
D. Gruhl et al., How to build a WebFountain: an architecture for very large-scale text analytics, IBM Systems Journal43(1) (2004) 64-77.
97.
M. Gamon et al., Pulse: mining customer opinions from free text (IDA 2005), Lecture Notes in Computer Science3646 (2005) 121-32.
98.
D. Gruhl et al., The predictive power of online chatter. In: R.L. Grossman et al. (eds), KDD '05: Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery in Data Mining (ACM Press, New York , 2005) 78-87.
99.
D. Gruhl et al. Information diffusion through Blogspace. In: WWW2004, New York. (2004). Available at: www.2004.org/proceedings/docs/1p491.pdf (accessed 10 July 2006 ).
100.
M. Thelwall , R. Prabowo and R. Fairclough, Are raw RSS feeds suitable for broad issue scanning? A science concern case study, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology57(12) (2006) 1644-54.
101.
M. Thelwall and R. Prabowo, Identifying and characterizing public science-related concerns from RSS feeds , Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology58(3) (2007) 379-90.
102.
S.A. Golder , D. Wilkinson and B.A. Huberman, Rhythms of social interaction: messaging within a massive online network. In: 3rd International Conference on Communities and Technologies (CT2007) , East Lansing, MI, (2007) Available at: www.hpl.hp.com/research/idl/papers/facebook/facebook.pd (accessed 7 January 2008).
103.
d. boyd , Friendster and publicly articulated social networks. In: Conference on Human Factors and Computing Systems (CHI 2004, Vienna: April 24-29) ( ACM Press, New York, 2004). Available at: www.danah.org/papers/CHI2004Friendster.pdf (accessed 3 July 2007).
104.
d. boyd, Friends, Friendsters, and MySpace Top 8: writing community into being on social network sites, First Monday11(2) (2006). Available at: www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue11_12/boyd/index.html (accessed 23 June 2007).
105.
M. Thelwall , Social networks, gender and friending: an analysis of MySpace member profiles. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (forthcoming). Available at: www.scit.wlv.ac.uk/~cm1993/papers/MySpace_d.doc (accessed 23 August 2007).
106.
T. Escher, The Geography of (Online) Social Networks (Web 2.0, York University) (2007). Available at: http://people.oii.ox.ac.uk/escher/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/Escher_York_presentation.pdf (accessed 18 September 2007).
107.
L. Prescott , Hitwise US Consumer Generated Media Report (2007). Available at: www.hitwise.com/ (accessed 19 March 2007 ).
108.
D. Wilkinson et al., Motivations for academic Web site interlinking: evidence for the Web as a novel source of information on informal scholarly communication, Journal of Information Science29(1) (2003) 49-56.
109.
S. Robinson et al., The Role of Networking in Research Activities (NetReAct D4.1) (Empirica Gesellschaft für Kommunikations- und Technologieforschung mbH, Bonn, Germany, 2006).
