Related papers: Revisiting Relative Indicators and Provisional Tru…
We submit newly developed citation impact indicators based not on arithmetic averages of citations but on percentile ranks. Citation distributions are-as a rule-highly skewed and should not be arithmetically averaged. With percentile ranks,…
In recent years bibliometricians have paid increasing attention to research evaluation methodological problems, among these being the choice of the most appropriate indicators for evaluating quality of scientific publications, and thus for…
Percentile-based approaches have been proposed as a non-parametric alternative to parametric central-tendency statistics to normalize observed citation counts. Percentiles are based on an ordered set of citation counts in a reference set,…
It is shown that under certain circumstances in particular for small datasets the recently proposed citation impact indicators I3(6PR) and R(6,k) behave inconsistently when additional papers or citations are taken into consideration. Three…
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…
Journal Impact Factors (IFs) can be considered historically as the first attempt to normalize citation distributions by using averages over two years. However, it has been recognized that citation distributions vary among fields of science…
In the final analysis citation-based indicators are inferior to effective peer review and even peer review is flawed. It is impossible to accurately measure the value or impact of scientific research and a key task of scientometricians…
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…
Metrics based on percentile ranks (PRs) for measuring scholarly impact involves complex treatment because of various defects such as overvaluing or devaluing an object caused by percentile ranking schemes, ignoring precise citation…
Heretofore, the only way to evaluate an author has been frequency-based citation metrics that assume citations to be of a neutral sentiment. However, considering the sentiment behind citations aids in a better understanding of the…
There are various mathematical models proposed in the recent literature for estimating the h-index through bibliometric measures, such as number of articles (P) and citations received (C). These models have been previously empirically…
Over the past decade, national research evaluation exercises, traditionally conducted using the peer review method, have begun opening to bibliometric indicators. The citations received by a publication are assumed as proxy for its quality,…
Alternative metrics (aka altmetrics) are gaining increasing interest in the scientometrics community as they can capture both the volume and quality of attention that a research work receives online. Nevertheless, there is limited knowledge…
Allocation of research funding, as well as promotion and tenure decisions, are increasingly made using indicators and impact factors drawn from citations to published work. A debate among scientometricians about proper normalization of…
The use of quantitative indicators of scientific productivity seems now quite widespread for assessing researchers and research institutions. There is a general perception, however, that these indicators are not necessarily representative…
Bibliometric indicators, citation counts and/or download counts are increasingly being used to inform personnel decisions such as hiring or promotions. These statistics are very often misused. Here we provide a guide to the factors which…
Citation numbers are extensively used for assessing the quality of scientific research. The use of raw citation counts is generally misleading, especially when applied to cross-disciplinary comparisons, since the average number of citations…
The impact of individual scientists is commonly quantified using citation-based measures. The most common such measure is the h-index. A scientist's h-index affects hiring, promotion, and funding decisions, and thus shapes the progress of…
We study the statistics of citations made to the indexed Science journals in the Journal Citation Reports during the period 2004-2013 using different measures. We consider different measures which quantify the impact of the journals. To our…
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…