Related papers: How large is the error effect when summing or aver…
There is a very important problem that has not attracted sufficient attention in academia, i.e., nonlinear field normalization citation counts at the paper level obtained using nonlinear field normalization methods cannot be added or…
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…
Different scientific fields have different citation practices. Citation-based bibliometric indicators need to normalize for such differences between fields in order to allow for meaningful between-field comparisons of citation impact.…
Usage of field-normalized citation scores is a bibliometric standard. Different methods for field-normalization are in use, but also the choice of field-classification system determines the resulting field-normalized citation scores. Using…
If we want to assess whether the paper in question has had a particularly high or low citation impact compared to other papers, the standard practice in bibliometrics is to normalize citations in respect of the subject category and…
Governments sometimes need to analyse sets of research papers within a field in order to monitor progress, assess the effect of recent policy changes, or identify areas of excellence. They may compare the average citation impacts of the…
We address the question how citation-based bibliometric indicators can best be normalized to ensure fair comparisons between publications from different scientific fields and different years. In a systematic large-scale empirical analysis,…
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…
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,…
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,…
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…
Field-normalization of citations is bibliometric standard. Despite the observed differences in citation counts between fields, the question remains how strong fields influence citation rates beyond the effect of attributes or factors…
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,…
Field normalization plays a crucial role in scientometrics to ensure fair comparisons across different disciplines. In this paper, we revisit the effectiveness of several widely used field normalization methods. Our findings indicate that…
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 networks have fed numerous works in scientific evaluation, science mapping (and more recently large-scale network studies) for decades. The variety of citation behavior across scientific fields is both a research topic in sociology…
Clustering of publication networks is an efficient way to obtain classifications of large collections of research publications. Such classifications can be used to, e.g., detect research topics, normalize citation relations, or explore the…
Citation metrics are becoming pervasive in the quantitative evaluation of scholars, journals and institutions. More then ever before, hiring, promotion, and funding decisions rely on a variety of impact metrics that cannot disentangle…
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…
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…