Bibliometric methods: pitfalls and possibilities.

By Johan A. Wallin. Basic & Clinical Pharmacology & Toxicology, 2005

797 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

The battle of the buzzwords: A comparative review of the circular economy and the sharing economy concepts (2021, methodology): “Qualitative analysis can remedy this notion (Wallin, 2005); therefore, this study also conducted a content analysis.”
The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact? (2015, methodology): “In order to extract and manipulate data, bibliometric methods, based on content or citation analysis, are often used (Wallin 2005).”
Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of science versus scopus and google scholar (2007, background): “…general, citation counts or rankings are considered partial indicators of research impact and quality, often used to support or question other indicators such as peer judgment (Borgman & Furner, 2002; Cronin, 1984; Holden, Rosenberg, & Barker, 2005; Moed, 2005; van Raan, 1996, 2005; Wallin, 2005).”
Bibliometric Methods in Management and Organization (2015, neutral): “It is quite possible for bad scientific work to receive more citations than mere mediocre work (Wallin, 2005).”