Evaluation of research publications and publication channels in astronomy and astrophysics

TL;DR

This paper reviews bibliometric methods and challenges in evaluating astronomy research, discusses the use of commercial tools and altmetrics, and examines national journal ranking systems in Nordic countries.

Contribution

It provides a critical overview of bibliometric evaluation challenges and explores the potential and limitations of new metrics and ranking systems in astronomy.

Findings

Inherent problems exist in classification systems used for bibliometrics.

Commercial altmetrics may supplement evaluation but are more suited for promotion.

Nordic countries' ranking systems influence national funding based on publication volume.

Abstract

The astronomy community usually turns to the Astrophysics Data System for bibliometrics. When the context is cross-disciplinary, commercial products like Web of Science and Scopus are used along with related analytics tools instead. The results are often tainted by inherent problems in the chosen classification system. A review of the most common challenges and pitfalls is given. Commercial altmetrics products could be added to the evaluation toolbox in the near future despite the fact that they are best suited for promotion instead of evaluation. Norway, Denmark, and Finland have created journal and publisher ranking systems that are used in national funding models. Differences in how astronomy journals are weighed in these systems night be related to the volume of papers published on a national level.