Related papers: A systematic empirical comparison of different app…
In order to assess Microsoft Academic as a useful data source for evaluative bibliometrics it is crucial to know, if citation counts from Microsoft Academic could be used in common normalization procedures and whether the normalized scores…
The analysis of bibliometric networks, such as co-authorship, bibliographic coupling, and co-citation networks, has received a considerable amount of attention. Much less attention has been paid to the construction of these networks. We…
Bibliometric methods for the analysis of highly specialized subjects are increasingly investigated and debated. Information and assessments well-focused at the specialty level can help make important decisions in research and innovation…
Journal rankings are widely used and are often based on citation data in combination with a network perspective. We argue that some of these network-based rankings can produce misleading results. From a theoretical point of view, we show…
Scholars frequently employ relatedness measures to estimate the similarity between two different items (e.g., documents, authors, and institutes). Such relatedness measures are commonly based on overlapping references ($\textit{i.e.}$,…
The recently proposed Euclidean index offers a novel approach to measure the citation impact of academic authors, in particular as an alternative to the h-index. We test if the index provides new, robust information, not covered by existing…
Most Performance-based Research Funding Systems (PRFS) draw on peer review and bibliometric indicators, two different methodologies which are sometimes combined. A common argument against the use of indicators in such research evaluation…
Ageing of publications, percentage of self-citations, and impact vary from journal to journal within fields of science. The assumption that citation and publication practices are homogenous within specialties and fields of science is…
The discussion about counting methods in bibliometrics is often reduced to the choice between full and fractional counting. However, several studies document that this distinction is too simple. The aim of the present study is to give an…
In our chapter we address the statistical analysis of percentiles: How should the citation impact of institutions be compared? In educational and psychological testing, percentiles are already used widely as a standard to evaluate an…
This paper explores a new indicator of journal citation impact, denoted as source normalized impact per paper (SNIP). It measures a journal's contextual citation impact, taking into account characteristics of its properly defined subject…
In this contribution, we deal with seed-based information retrieval in networks of research publications. Using systematic reviews as a baseline, and publication data from the NIH Open Citation Collection, we compare the performance of the…
The journal Impact Factor (IF) is not comparable among fields of Science and Social Science because of systematic differences in publication and citation behaviour across disciplines. In this work, a decomposing of the field aggregate…
We study the statistics of citations made to the top ranked indexed journals for Science and Social Science databases in the Journal Citation Reports using different measures. Total annual citation and impact factor, as well as a third…
The Center for Science and Technology Studies at Leiden University advocates the use of specific normalizations for assessing research performance with reference to a world average. The Journal Citation Score (JCS) and Field Citation Score…
This article compares (1) citation analysis with OpenAlex and Scopus, testing their citation counts, document type/coverage and subject classifications and (2) three citation-based indicators: raw counts, (field and year) Normalised…
Assessing a cited paper's impact is typically done by analyzing its citation context in isolation within the citing paper. While this focuses on the most directly relevant text, it prevents relative comparisons across all the works a paper…
Citation analysis is one of the most frequently used methods in research evaluation. We are seeing significant growth in citation analysis through bibliometric metadata, primarily due to the availability of citation databases such as the…
We find evidence for the universality of two relative bibliometric indicators of the quality of individual scientific publications taken from different data sets. One of these is a new index that considers both citation and reference…
Citation metrics are analytic measures used to evaluate the usage, impact and dissemination of scientific research. Traditionally, citation metrics have been independently measured at each level of the publication pyramid, namely at the…