Related papers: Three practical field normalised alternative indic…
Two commonly used ideas in the development of citation-based research performance indicators are the idea of normalizing citation counts based on a field classification scheme and the idea of recursive citation weighing (like in…
Recently, two new indicators (Equalized Mean-based Normalized Proportion Cited, EMNPC, and Mean-based Normalized Proportion Cited, MNPC) were proposed which are intended for sparse data. We propose a third indicator (Mantel-Haenszel…
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…
In this study, the academic status of users of scientific publications in Mendeley is explored in order to analyse the usage pattern of Mendeley users in terms of subject fields, citation and readership impact. The main focus of this study…
Hutchins, Yuan, M., and Santangelo (2015) proposed the Relative Citation Ratio (RCR) as a new field-normalized impact indicator. This study investigates the RCR by correlating it on the level of single publications with established…
This book critically analyses the value of citation data, altmetrics, and artificial intelligence to support the research evaluation of articles, scholars, departments, universities, countries, and funders. It introduces and discusses…
Purpose: Analyze the diversity of citation distributions to publications in different research topics to investigate the accuracy of size-independent, rank-based indicators. Top percentile-based indicators are the most common indicators of…
This paper measures social media activity of 15 broad scientific disciplines indexed in Scopus database using Altmetric.com data. First, the presence of Altmetric.com data in Scopus database is investigated, overall and across disciplines.…
Thelwall (2017a, 2017b) proposed a new family of field- and time-normalized indicators, which is intended for sparse data. These indicators are based on units of analysis (e.g., institutions) rather than on the paper level. They compare the…
Measuring the impact of a publication in a fair way is a significant challenge in bibliometrics, as it must not introduce biases between fields and should enable comparison of the impact of publications from different years. In this paper,…
Evaluating text revision in scientific writing remains a challenge, as traditional metrics such as ROUGE and BERTScore primarily focus on similarity rather than capturing meaningful improvements. In this work, we analyse and identify the…
The journal impact factor 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 source normalization of the journal impact…
Citation recommendation systems have attracted much academic interest, resulting in many studies and implementations. These systems help authors automatically generate proper citations by suggesting relevant references based on the text…
Field normalized citation rates are well-established indicators for research performance from the broadest aggregation levels such as countries, down to institutes and research teams. When applied to still more specialized publication sets…
We explore if and how Microsoft Academic (MA) could be used for bibliometric analyses. First, we examine the Academic Knowledge API (AK API), an interface to access MA data, and compare it to Google Scholar (GS). Second, we perform a…
Following in the footsteps of the model of scientific communication, which has recently gone through a metamorphosis (from the Gutenberg galaxy to the Web galaxy), a change in the model and methods of scientific evaluation is also taking…
The importance of collaboration in research is widely accepted, as is the fact that articles with more authors tend to be more cited. Nevertheless, although previous studies have investigated whether the apparent advantage of collaboration…
It is widely recognized that citation counts for papers from different fields cannot be directly compared because different scientific fields adopt different citation practices. Citation counts are also strongly biased by paper age since…
Journal Impact Factor is a popular metric for determining the quality of a journal in academia. The number of citations received by a journal is a crucial factor in determining the impact factor, which may be misused in multiple ways.…
The arguments presented demonstrate that the Mean Normalized Citation Score (MNCS) and other size-independent indicators based on the ratio to publications are not indicators of research performance. The article provides examples of the…