<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
			<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
				<channel>
					<atom:link href="https://www.cwts.nl:443/do/?rss&amp;t=b" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
					<title>CWTS Blog</title>
					<link>https://www.cwts.nl/blog</link>
					<description>Latest CWTS blog posts</description>
					<language>en-EN</language>
					<pubDate>Thu, 13 Jul 2017 19:17:09 +0200</pubDate>
					
				<item>
					<title>Ten principles for the responsible use of university rankings</title>
					<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.cwts.nl/m-z294?article=n-r2q274</guid>
					<pubDate>Wed, 17 May 2017 12:33:00 +0200</pubDate>
					<description>
	We present ten principles that are intended to guide universities, students, governments, and other stakeholders in the responsible use of university rankings.
</description>
					<link>https://www.cwts.nl/blog?article=n-r2q274&amp;title=ten-principles-for-the-responsible-use-of-university-rankings</link>
				</item>
				<item>
					<title>UK universities and European industry: inseparable research partners?</title>
					<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.cwts.nl/m-z294?article=n-q2z2a4</guid>
					<pubDate>Wed, 05 Apr 2017 08:30:00 +0200</pubDate>
					<description>
	Universities and their business sector partners (&amp;lsquo;industry&amp;rsquo;) are at the heart of the UK science and innovation system. Many university-industry interactions (UIIs) start with, or are supported by, joint research between academic researchers and industry R&amp;D staff employed by research-active business enterprises. Close personal relationships between individuals may also arise from the job mobility of postdocs, researchers or professors who cross over from academia and the corporate sector, or from those with temporary or part-time affiliations on either side.
</description>
					<link>https://www.cwts.nl/blog?article=n-q2z2a4&amp;title=uk-universities-and-european-industry-inseparable-research-partners</link>
				</item>
				<item>
					<title>The end of gender disparities in science? If only it were true...</title>
					<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.cwts.nl/m-z294?article=n-q2z294</guid>
					<pubDate>Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:54:00 +0200</pubDate>
					<description>
	There has been a resurgence of interest in the last few years regarding gender disparities and bias in science.
</description>
					<link>https://www.cwts.nl/blog?article=n-q2z294&amp;title=the-end-of-gender-disparities-in-science-if-only-it-were-true</link>
				</item>
				<item>
					<title>Use of the journal impact factor for assessing individual articles need not be wrong</title>
					<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.cwts.nl/m-z294?article=n-q2z254</guid>
					<pubDate>Wed, 08 Mar 2017 07:45:00 +0100</pubDate>
					<description>
	Without any doubt, the journal impact factor (IF) is one of the most debated scientometric indicators. Especially the use of the IF for assessing individual articles and their authors is highly controversial. Most scientometricians reject this way of using the IF. They argue that the IF tells something about a journal as a whole and that it is statistically incorrect to extend its interpretation to individual articles in a journal. The well-known San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment, which has received widespread support in the scientific community, also strongly objects against the use of the IF at the level of individual articles. Even Clarivate Analytics, the company that calculates the IF, advices against IF-based assessment of individual articles.
</description>
					<link>https://www.cwts.nl/blog?article=n-q2z254&amp;title=use-of-the-journal-impact-factor-for-assessing-individual-articles-need-not-be-wrong</link>
				</item>
				<item>
					<title>Q&amp;A on Elsevier's CiteScore metric</title>
					<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.cwts.nl/m-z294?article=n-q2y254</guid>
					<pubDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2016 08:42:00 +0100</pubDate>
					<description>
	Yesterday Elsevier launched the CiteScore journal metric. Ludo Waltman, responsible for the Advanced Bibliometric Methods working group at CWTS, answers some questions on the bibliometric aspects of this new metric.
</description>
					<link>https://www.cwts.nl/blog?article=n-q2y254&amp;title=qa-on-elseviers-citescore-metric</link>
				</item>
				<item>
					<title>VOSviewer: Latest improvements and future plans</title>
					<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.cwts.nl/m-z294?article=n-q2x2b4</guid>
					<pubDate>Wed, 28 Sep 2016 10:28:00 +0200</pubDate>
					<description>
	Today VOSviewer version 1.6.5&amp;nbsp; has been released. This new version of our software tool for constructing and visualizing bibliometric networks includes many improvements. In this blog post, we discuss some of the more important improvements. We also look ahead and discuss some anticipated future developments related to VOSviewer.
</description>
					<link>https://www.cwts.nl/blog?article=n-q2x2b4&amp;title=vosviewer-latest-improvements-and-future-plans</link>
				</item>
				<item>
					<title>Journal self-citations are increasingly biased toward impact factor years</title>
					<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.cwts.nl/m-z294?article=n-q2x264</guid>
					<pubDate>Thu, 25 Aug 2016 20:35:00 +0200</pubDate>
					<description>
	Today the paper A large-scale analysis of impact factor biased journal self-citations has appeared in PLOS ONE.
</description>
					<link>https://www.cwts.nl/blog?article=n-q2x264&amp;title=journal-self-citations-are-increasingly-biased-toward-impact-factor-years</link>
				</item>
				<item>
					<title>Let's move beyond too simplistic notions of 'misuse' and 'unintended effects' in debates on the JIF</title>
					<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.cwts.nl/m-z294?article=n-q2x234</guid>
					<pubDate>Tue, 12 Jul 2016 15:36:00 +0200</pubDate>
					<description>
	Researchers in the field of scientometrics are quite often robust in their criticisms
</description>
					<link>https://www.cwts.nl/blog?article=n-q2x234&amp;title=lets-move-beyond-too-simplistic-notions-of-misuse-and-unintended-effects-in-debates-on-the-jif</link>
				</item>
				<item>
					<title>The importance of taking a clear position in the impact factor debate</title>
					<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.cwts.nl/m-z294?article=n-q2w2c4</guid>
					<pubDate>Mon, 11 Jul 2016 20:35:00 +0200</pubDate>
					<description>
	Last week, the paper A simple proposal for the publication of journal citation distributions&amp;nbsp;appeared online.&amp;nbsp;
</description>
					<link>https://www.cwts.nl/blog?article=n-q2w2c4&amp;title=the-importance-of-taking-a-clear-position-in-the-impact-factor-debate</link>
				</item>
				<item>
					<title>What do we know about journal citation cartels? A call for information</title>
					<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.cwts.nl/m-z294?article=n-q2w2b4</guid>
					<pubDate>Fri, 24 Jun 2016 12:30:00 +0200</pubDate>
					<description>
	Systematic knowledge on citation cartels of scientific journals is surprisingly scarce.
</description>
					<link>https://www.cwts.nl/blog?article=n-q2w2b4&amp;title=what-do-we-know-about-journal-citation-cartels-a-call-for-information</link>
				</item>
				</channel>
			</rss>