BIBLIOMETRIC EVALUATION OF SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE IN THE AREA OF RESEARCH IN EDUCATION USING INCITES™ DATABASE OF THOMSON REUTERS

Introduction:
InCites™ uses data from seven editions of the Thomson Reuters Web of Science™ Core Collection for its publication counts and indicators. InCites™ is currently the only available tool that allows to aggregate data concerning citations that would be divided into areas, journals and scientific institutions, using multi-criteria search. Contrary to such database as Scopus® or Google Schoolar, InCites™ offers a much broader range of analytical possibilities and creating bibliometric statements.

Aim of study:
Bibliometric evaluation of scientific literature in the field of research in education.

Materials and Methods:
InCites™ bibliometric database was used for analysis; it collects data concerning citations that come from, e.g. Science Citation Index, Social Science Citation Index®, and Arts and Humanities Citation Index®. Educational Research (ER), Educational Psychology (EP), and Educational - Scientific disciplines (ES), these are categories for which InCites™ database sees the possibility of reporting the citation index. Citations from the years of 2004-2014 for three above mentioned categories were evaluated. In total, there were 237 692 documents and 680 279 citations were included in the source data.

Impact factor values for the most renowned journals and publications, and the number of citations for the best research centres (universities and other institutions that focus on a combination of education and research) that operate in the field of research in education worldwide were compared.

Results:
From among the analysed journals, the ones of most great impact factor were: Child Development (35 385, category of EP), Academic Medicine (29 704, category of ES) and Computers & Education (20 416, category of ER). From among the scientific institutions that have the strongest position in the field of research in education, the following could be listed: University of California System and Pennsylvania Commonwealth System of Higher Education (citations was 33 488 and 20 134 respectively). Among publications that were of the highest impact factor in individual categories, the following drew attention: Preacher KJ et al. (Journal Of Educational And Behavioral Statistics 2006; 31(4):437-448); Frazier PA et al. (Journal Of Counseling Psychology 2004; 51(1): 115-134); Issenberg S Bet al. (Medical Teacher 2005; 27(1): 10-28) with citations 789 (category of ER), 1015 (category of EP) and 636 (category of ES) respectively. Moreover, a detailed analysis of individual publications, shows that participation of American research centres dominates considering the overall number of citations in this discipline of science. Most broadly disputed issues include methodology of research in psychology and education, and publications concerning educational diagnostics and evaluation of various methods of teaching.

Conclusions:
Results of bibliometric analysis allow to determine the direction of research development in the field of education, point out the most important tendencies and interests of the scientific circles in this area. Such analyses may also be helpful when planning future research strategies, they may also become a valuable source of information for scientists seeking co-partners. Organising network research group may be based on data concerning interests and scientific achievements of certain groups or institutions coming from different countries or continents.