Scopus represents a valid support for all researchers. In short steps, it shows the subdivision of our papers published in article, review, editorial and conference paper.
Currently, I have 53 works published in Scopus and about 5.7% are conference papers. Is it high, medium or low? Is it possible to define a target value for each scientific area?
Attending conferences provide us with golden opportunities to meet in person the great scholars of our field. I personally think that for every six to seven published papers , an international conference is a proper ratio.
Dear Reza thanks for your support. The great value of conferences is objective. However, not all conferences are indexed in Scopus database. So your response is referred to all conferences or conferences indexed in Scopus?
A good response from Reza. Idiano - your ratio does not seem out of place. I have seen profiles (especially of professors - which seems odd to me) where nearly their entire 'publication' portfolio is conference proceedings. I personally question that. You do raise the important point, however, about if the conferences are indexed. Let's say all your journal publications are in reputable, good impact journals - but your conferences are not indexed (or not all of them). That is still acceptable in my mind. If your conference papers are not indexed AND your journal publications are mostly in low-quality sources - then they both combine to present a 'questionable' overall profile.
Dear Dean thanks for your words. Congratulations because your response has a high value-added.
Hi,
I suggest that you observe the ratio of conference papers to articles and books in your subject area in the Web of Science database, and follow the ratio presented in this source.Generally, articles and books are cited more than conference papers, although the citation trend could depend on the discipline. In computer science, for instance, conferences could be cited as much as articles.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Papers