Related papers: Mathematical reflections on modified fractional co…
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…
The ISI-Impact Factors suffer from a number of drawbacks, among them the statistics-why should one use the mean and not the median?-and the incomparability among fields of science because of systematic differences in citation behavior among…
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 order to take multiple co-authorship appropriately into account, a straightforward modification of the Hirsch index was recently proposed. Fractionalised counting of the papers yields an appropriate measure which is called the hm-index.…
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…
The citation potential is a measure of the probability of being cited. Obviously, it is different among fields of science, social science, and humanities because of systematic differences in publication and citation behaviour across…
In the case of the scientometric evaluation of multi- or interdisciplinary units one risks to compare apples with oranges: each paper has to assessed in comparison to an appropriate reference set. We suggest that the set of citing papers…
Bibliometric studies often rely on field-normalized citation impact indicators in order to make comparisons between scientific fields. We discuss the connection between field normalization and the choice of a counting method for handling…
The purpose of this study is to compare the changing behavior of two counting methods (whole counting and whole-normalized counting) and inflation rate at country level research productivity and impact. For this, publication data on…
Van Raan et al. (2010; arXiv:1003.2113) have proposed a new indicator (MNCS) for field normalization. Since field normalization is also used in the Leiden Rankings of universities, we elaborate our critique of journal normalization in…
In their study entitled "Constructing bibliometric networks: A comparison between full and fractional counting," Perianes-Rodriguez, Waltman, & van Eck (2016; henceforth abbreviated as PWvE) provide arguments for the use of fractional…
Fractional counting of citations can improve on ranking of multi-disciplinary research units (such as universities) by normalizing the differences among fields of science in terms of differences in citation behavior. Furthermore,…
In the case of the scientometric evaluation of multi- or interdisciplinary units one risks to compare apples with oranges: each paper has to be assessed in comparison to an appropriate reference set. We suggest that the set of citing papers…
Nowadays impact factor is the significant indicator for journal evaluation. In impact factor calculation is used number of all citations to journal, regardless of the prestige of cited journals, however, scientific units (paper, researcher,…
Using the CD-ROM version of the Science Citation Index 2010 (N = 3,705 journals), we study the (combined) effects of (i) fractional counting on the impact factor (IF) and (ii) transformation of the skewed citation distributions into a…
Two methods for comparing impact factors and citation rates across fields of science are tested against each other using citations to the 3,705 journals in the Science Citation Index 2010 (CD-Rom version of SCI) and the 13 field categories…
Several performance measures are used to evaluate binary and multiclass classification tasks. But individual observations may often have distinct weights, and none of these measures are sensitive to such varying weights. We propose a new…
Devising an index to measure the quality of research is a challenging task. In this paper, we propose a set of indices to evaluate the quality of research produced by an author. Our indices utilize a policy that assigns the weights to…
I describe a simple modification which can be applied to any citation count-based index (e.g. Hirsch's h-index) quantifying a researcher's publication output. The key idea behind the proposed approach is that the merit for the citations of…
The impact of scientific publications has traditionally been expressed in terms of citation counts. However, scientific activity has moved online over the past decade. To better capture scientific impact in the digital era, a variety of new…