English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Evaluative bibliometrics is concerned with comparing research units by usingstatistical procedures. According to Williams (2012) an empirical study shouldbe concerned with the substantive and practical significance of the findings aswell as the sign and statistical significance of effects. In this study we willexplain what adjusted predictions and marginal effects are and how useful theyare for institutional evaluative bibliometrics. As an illustration, we willcalculate a regression model using publications (and citation data) produced byfour universities in German-speaking countries from 1980 to 2010. We will showhow these predictions and effects can be estimated and plotted, and how thismakes it far easier to get a practical feel for the substantive meaning ofresults in evaluative bibliometric studies. We will focus particularly onAverage Adjusted Predictions (AAPs), Average Marginal Effects (AMEs), AdjustedPredictions at Representative Values (APRVs) and Marginal Effects atRepresentative Values (MERVs).

How to calculate the practical significance of citation impact  differences? An empirical example from evaluative institutional bibliometrics  using adjusted predictions and marginal effects