Keywords
Dimensions
Research Performance
National Autonomous University of Mexico
How to Cite
Abstract
This study explores the use of Scival and Dimensions, two widely adopted bibliometric platforms for evaluating research performance, in the academic production of two research institutions of the National Autonomous University of Mexico. The objective is to compare the use of classic bibliometric indicators such as authors, journals, countries, and topics with the indicators proposed by each platform: field-weighted citation impact (FWCI) in Scival and relative citation ratio (RCR) in Dimensions. The methodology included the evaluation of the indexed academic output of the Institute for Research in Applied Mathematics and Systems and of the Institute of Astronomy in the mentioned bibliometric platforms. Among the principal results we should point out the temporal scope: while Scival considers publications from 1996 onward, Dimensions has a broader retrospective coverage, also, the latest only includes documents with a digital object identifier. Regarding classic indicators, we found that Scival provides more ready-to-use tables and graphs on scientific output. With respect to the FWCI and RCR indicators, the results show that they represent a static, disciplinary approach versus a dynamic, multidisciplinary one based on co-citation.
References
Alviggi, Carlo, Rossella E. Nappi, Antonio La Marca, Filippo Maria Ubaldi y Alberto Vaiarelli. 2024. “The Metrics Maze in Science: Navigating Academic Evaluation Without Journalistic Pressures”. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 49 (1), 103935. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2024.103935
Arroyo-Machado, Wenceslao (@Wences). 2024. “Manejo de índices de citas y bases de datos - Scival”. HackMD, última modificación el 17 de abril de 2024. https://hackmd.io/@Wences/11_scival?utm_source=preview-mode&utm_medium=rec
Bode, Christian, Christian Herzog, Daniel Hook, Robert Mcgrath y Alex Wade. 2023. A Guide to the Dimensions Data Approach: A Collaborative Approach to Creating a Modern Infrastructure for Data Describing Research: Where We Are and Where We Want to Take It, (Dimensions Report). Digital Science. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.5783094
Bornmann, Lutz, Charles Crothers y Robin Haunschild. 2025. “Citation Concept Analysis (CCA) of Concepts Introduced by Pierre Bourdieu: Measuring Their Impact Across Fields and Periods”. Journal of Data and Information Science 10 (1): 26-46. https://doi.org/10.2478/JDIS-2025-0009
Cruz-Castro, Laura, y Luis Sanz-Menendez. 2021. “What Should Be Rewarded? Gender and Evaluation Criteria for Tenure and Promotion”. Journal of Informetrics 15 (3), 101196. https://doi.orwg/10.1016/j.joi.2021.101196
Danesh, Farshid, y Ali Mardani-Nejad. 2021. “A Historical Overview of Bibliometrics”. En Handbook Bibliometrics, editado por Rafael Ball, 7-18. De Gruyter Saur. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110646610-003
Dimensions Help Center. s. f. “What Is the RCR? How Is the RCR Score Calculated?”. Need Help Using Dimensions? Última modificación en febrero de 2025. https://help.dimensions.ai/en/articles/9780865
Elsevier. 2019. Research Metrics Guidebook. Elsevier. https://supportcontent.elsevier.com/RightNow%20Next%20Gen/SciVal/ACAD_RL_ElsevierResearchMetricsBook_WEB.pdf
Elsevier. 2023. Content Coverage Guide. Elsevier. https://assets.ctfassets.net/o78em1y1w4i4/EX1iy8VxBeQKf8aN2XzOp/c36f79db-25484cb38a5972ad9a5472ec/Scopus_ContentCoverage_Guide_WEB.pdf
Elsevier. 2024a. “Scival Metric: Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI)”. Using the Product, Scival Support Center. Última modificación 15 de noviembre de 2024. https://service.elsevier.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/28192/supporthub/scival/p/10961/28192/
Elsevier. 2024b. “What Are Snowball Metrics”. Content, Scival Support Center. Última modificación el 15 de noviembre de 2024. https://service.elsevier.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/18085/supporthub/scival/kw/snowball+metrics/
Elsevier. s. f. “Snowball Metrics: Standardized Research Metrics – by the Sector for the Sector”. Insights, Snowball Metrics. Consultado el 21 de septiembre de 2025. https://www.elsevier.com/insights/metrics/snowball-metrics
Forsberg, Eva, Lars Geschwind, Sara Levander y Wieland Wermke, eds. 2022. Peer Review in an Era of Evaluation: Understanding the Practice of Gatekeeping in Academia. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-75263-7
Girard, Ivana Matic, y Olivier Girard. 2024. “University Rankings in Sport Science: A True Reflection of Excellence?”. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance 20 (4): 600-4. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2024-0109
Gorbea Portal, Salvador, Maricela Piña Pozas y Vanessa Montserrat Dávila Conn. 2023. Metría de la información, revisiones sistemáticas y metaanálisis. Instituto de Investigaciones Bibliotecológicas y de la Información, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. https://ru.iibi.unam.mx/jspui/handle/IIBI_UNAM/713
Hernández-González, V., N. Sans-Rosell, M. C. Jové-Deltell y J. Reverter-Masia. 2016. “Comparación entre Web of Science y Scopus, estudio bibliométrico de las revistas de anatomía y morfología”. International Journal of Morphology 34 (4): 1369-77. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-95022016000400032
Ili, Burak. 2025. “Academic Quality or Commercial Concern? The Role of APCs in Open-Access Communication Studies Journals”. TripleC 23 (1): 74-93. https://doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v23i1.1547
Krauskopf, Erwin, y Mauricio Salgado. 2023. “Inconsistency in the Registration of the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) of Articles on Web of Science and Scopus”. Investigación Bibliotecológica: archivonomía, bibliotecología e información 37 (96): 129-44. https://doi.org/10.22201/IIBI.24488321XE.2023.96.58784
Lobo Flores, Trino Fernando. 2023. “Procesos de privatización en la educación”. Revista Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades 4 (1): 113-23. https://doi.org/10.56712/latam.v4i1.227
Monge-Nájera, Julián. 2014. “La invalidez del factor de impacto como indicador del impacto de las revistas científicas latinoamericanas”. Revista de Biología Tropical 62 (1): 407-12. https://doi.org/10.15517/rbt.v62i1.13540
Narin, Francis. 1976. Evaluative Bibliometrics: The Use of Publications and Citation Analysis in the Evaluation of Scientific Activity. Computer Horizons.
Ochsner, Michael, y Ginevra Peruginelli. 2022. “National Research Evaluation Systems and the Social Sciences”. En Handbook on Research Assessment in the Social Sciences, editado por Tim C. E. Engels y Emanuel Kulczycki, 416-33. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781800372559.00036
Ortiz-Núñez, Roelvis, Stephany Novo-Castro y Ricardo Casate-Fernández. 2023. “Indicators for the Evaluation of Science, Technology and Innovation Activities: A Systematized Review”. Journal of Scientometric Research 12 (2): 448-58. https://doi.org/10.5530/jscires.12.2.041
Pranckutė, Raminta. 2021. “Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World”. Publications 9 (1), 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications9010012
Romanos de Tiratel, Susana. 2008. “Paul Otlet, el antepasado olvidado: revisión bibliográfica, II. Aspectos tecnológicos e internacionales”. Información, Cultura y Sociedad (19): 13-34. https://www.scielo.org.ar/pdf/ics/n19/n19a02.pdf
Sen, B. K. 2015. “Ranganathan’s Contribution to Bibliometrics”. Annals of Library & Information Studies 62 (4): 222-25.
Shakeel, Yusra, Rand Alchokr, Jacob Krüger, Thomas Leich y Gunter Saake. 2022. “Altmetrics and Citation Counts: An Empirical Analysis of the Computer Science Domain”. En JCDL’22: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM / IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries in 2022, editado por Akiko Aizawa, Thomas Mandl, Zeljko Carevic, Annika Hinze, Philipp Mayr y Philipp Schaer, art. 17. Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3529372.3530939
Teixeira da Silva, Jaime A. 2025. “The Now-Defunct ResearchGate Score and the Extant Research Interest Score: A Continued Debate on Metrics of a Highly Popular Academic Social Networking Site”. Open Information Science 9 (1), e20240011. https://doi.org/10.1515/opis-2024-0011
Torres-Salinas, Daniel, Wenceslao Arroyo-Machado y Nicolás Robinson-García. 2025. Principles of Evaluative Bibliometrics in a DORA/CoARA Context. InfluScience Editions; Unidad de Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales Computacionales, Universidad de Granada. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14672066
Authors:
- They must sent the publication authorization letter to Investigación Bibliotecológica: archivonomía, bibliotecología e información.
- They can share the submission with the scientific community in the following ways:
- As teaching support material
- As the basis for lectures in academic conferences
- Self-archiving in academic repositories.
- Dissemination in academic networks.
- Posting to author’s blogs and personal websites
These allowances shall remain in effect as long as the conditions of use of the contents of the journal are duly observed pursuant to the Creative Commons:Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 license that it holds. DOI links for download the full text of published papers are provided for the last three uses.
Self-archiving policy
For self-archiving, authors must comply with the following
a) Acknowledge the copyright held by the journal Investigación Bibliotecológica: archivonomía, bibliotecología e información.
b) Establish a link to the original version of the paper on the journal page, using, for example, the DOI.
c) Disseminate the final version published in the journal.
Licensing of contents
The journal Investigación Bibliotecológica: archivonomía, bibliotecología e información allows access and use of its contents pursuant to the Creative Commons license: Attribution- Non-commercial-NoDerivatives 4.0.
Investigación Bibliotecológica: archivonomía, bibliotecología e información by Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional License.
Creado a partir de la obra en http://rev-ib.unam.mx/ib.
This means that contents can only be read and shared as long as the authorship of the work is acknowledged and cited. The work shall not be exploited for commercial ends nor shall it been modified.
Limitation of liability
The journal is not liable for academic fraud or plagiarism committed by authors, nor for the intellectual criteria they employ. Similarly, the journal shall not be liable for the services offered through third party hyperlinks contained in papers submitted by authors.
In support of this position, the journal provides the Author’s Duties notice at the following link: Responsibilities of authors.
The director or editor of the journal shall notify authors in the event it migrates the contents of the journal’s official website to a distinct IP or domain.