ستوده، هاجر؛ و یقطین، مریم (1393). شاخص‌ها و مدل‌های سنجش بهره‌وری علمی پژوهشگران، سیاست علم و فناوری، 3(1)، 47-59.

قانعی‌راد، محمدامین و قاضی‌پور، فریده (1381). عوامل هنجاری و سازمانی مؤثر بر میزان بهره‌وری اعضای هیئت علمی، نامه پژوهش، 4، 167-207.

موسوی چلک، افشین؛ سهیلی، فرامرز و خاصه، علی‌اکبر (1396). رابطۀ بین نفوذ اجتماعی و بهره‌وری و کارایی در شبکه اجتماعی هم‌نویسندگی پژوهشگران علوم قرآن و حدیث ایران، کتابداری و اطلاع‌رسانی، 20(3)، 50-75.

Abramo, G., Cicero, T., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2014). How do you define and measure research productivity?, scientometrics,  101, 1129-1144.

Aksnes, D. W., & Taxt, R. E. (2004). Peer reviews and bibliometric indicators: a comparative study at a Norwegian university. Research evaluation, 13(1), 33-41.

Allison, P. D., & Stewart, J. A. (1974). Productivity differences among scientists: Evidence for accumulative advantage. American sociological review, 596-606.

Bayer, A. E., & Folger, J. (1966). Some correlates of a citation measure of productivity in science. Sociology of education, 381-390.

Bonaccorsi, A., & Daraio, C. (2003). A robust nonparametric approach to the analysis of scientific productivity. Research evaluation, 12(1), 47-69.

Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. D. (2005). Does the h-index for ranking of scientists really work?. Scientometrics, 65(3), 391-392.

Bornmann, L., & Haunschild, R. (2017). Does evaluative scientometrics lose its main focus on scientific quality by the new orientation towards societal impact?. Scientometrics, 110(2), 937-943.‏

Chew, W. B. (1988). No-nonsense guide to measuring productivity. Harvard Business Review, 66(1), 110-118.

Cole, Jonathan. R., & Cole, Stephan. (1972). The Ortega hypothesis: Citation analysis suggests that only a few scientists contribute to scientific progress. Science, 178(4059), 368-375.

Edwards, S. A., & McCarrey, M. W. (1973). Measuring Performance of Researchers. Research Management, 16(1), 34-41.

Fedderke, J. W. (2013). The objectivity of national research foundation peer review in South Africa assessed against bibliometric indexes. Scientometrics, 97(2), 177-206.

Fiala, J., Mareš, J. J., & Šesták, J. (2017). Reflections on how to evaluate the professional value of scientific papers and their corresponding citations. Scientometrics, 112(1), 697-709.‏

Garfield, Eugene (1973).  More of Forecasting Noble Prizes and the Most Cited Scientists of 1972!, Current Contents,No. 40, 5-7.

Godin, B. (2009). The value of science: changing conceptions of scientific productivity, 1869 to circa 1970. Social Science Information, 48(4), 547-586.‏

Harnad, S. (2008). Validating research performance metrics against peer rankings. Ethics in science and environmental politics, 8(1), 103-107.‏

Hirsch, I., Milwitt, W., & Oakes, W. J. (1958).  Increasing the productivity of scientists, Harvard Bussiness Review, 36, 66-76.

Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National academy of Sciences of the United States of America, (Nov 15) 16569-16572. https://scival.com

Kenna, R., Mryglod, O., & Berche, B. (2017). A scientists' view of scientometrics: Not everything that counts can be counted. arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.10407.‏

Kosmulski, M. (2018).  Are you in top 1%?, scientomerics, 114(2), 557-565.

Kreiman, G., & Maunsell, J. (2011). Nine criteria for a measure of scientific output. Frontiers in computational neuroscience, 5, 48.‏

Lotka, A. J. (1926). The frequency distribution of scientific productivity.  Journal of the Washington Academy of Science, 16 (12), 317-323.

Merton, R. K. (1988). The Matthew effect in science, II: Cumulative advantage and the symbolism of intellectual property. isis, 79(4), 606-623.

Mose, T. B., & Lyhne, V. B. (2015). Gender differences and the role of social capital in academic productivity. Unpublished master’s thesis, Business School, Copenhagen.

Ramsden. Paul (1994).  Describing and explaining research productivity, Higher Education, 28(2), 207-226.

Rinia, E. J., Van Leeuwen, T. N., Van Vuren, H. G., & Van Raan, A. F. (1998). Comparative analysis of a set of bibliometric indicators and central peer review criteria: Evaluation of condensed matter physics in the Netherlands. Research policy, 27(1), 95-107.

Ruiz-Castillo, J. (2016). Research output indicators are not productivity indicators, informetrics, 10, 661-663.

Sahel, J. A. (2011). Quality versus quantity: assessing individual research performance. Science translational medicine, 3(84), 84cm13-84cm13.

Tangen, Stefan (2005). Demystifying productivity and performance, International Journal of productivity and performance management, 54(1), 34-46.

Tijssen, R. J., Visser, M. S., & Van Leeuwen, T. N. (2002). Benchmarking international scientific excellence: Are highly cited research papers an appropriate frame of reference?. Scientometrics, 54(3), 381-397.

Van Noorden, R. (2010). A profusion of measures: scientific performance indicators are proliferating--leading researchers to ask afresh what they are measuring and why. Richard Van Noorden surveys the rapidly evolving ecosystem. Nature, 465(7300), 864-867.

Van Raan, A. F. (2006). Comparison of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judgment for 147 chemistry research groups. scientometrics, 67(3), 491-502.

Vinkler, P. (2017). Core indicators and professional recognition of scientometricians. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(1), 234-242.

Zerem, Enver (2017).  The ranking of scientists based on scientific publications assessment, Journal of Biomedical Information, 75, 107-109..