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/

Zendy Plus

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

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

The purpose of this study is to compare the changing behavior of two countingmethods (whole counting and whole-normalized counting) and inflation rate atcountry level research productivity and impact. For this, publication data ontribology research published between 1998 and 2012 from SCOPUS has been used.Only internationally collaborated papers are considered for comparison betweentwo counting methods. The result of correlation tests shows that there ishighly correlation in all the four indicators between the two counting methods.However, the result of t-test shows that there is significant difference in thethree indicators (paper count, citation count and h-index) between the twocounting methods. This study concludes that whole-normalized counting(fractional) is the better choice for publication and citations counting at thecountry level assessment.

Whole counting vs. whole-normalized counting: A country level comparative study of internationally collaborated papers on Tribology