相关论文: Remaining problems with the "New Crown Indicator" …
In a previous article of ours, we explained the reasons why the MNCS and all similar per-publication citation indicators should not be used to measure research performance, whereas efficiency indicators (output to input) such as the FSS are…
Two journal-level indicators, respectively the mean ($m^i$) and the standard deviation ($v^i$) are proposed to be the core indicators of each journal and we show that quite several other indicators can be calculated from those two core…
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…
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…
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.…
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 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…
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…
The two most used citation impact indicators in the assessment of scientific journals are, nowadays, the impact factor and the h-index. However, both indicators are not field normalized (vary heavily depending on the scientific category)…
Recently, two new indicators (Equalized Mean-based Normalized Proportion Cited, EMNPC; Mean-based Normalized Proportion Cited, MNPC) were proposed which are intended for sparse scientometrics data. The indicators compare the proportion of…
Following discussions in 2010 and 2011, scientometric evaluators have increasingly abandoned relative indicators in favor of comparing observed with expected citation ratios. The latter method provides parameters with error values allowing…
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…
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…
This paper proposes an indicator of journals' scientific prestige, the SJR indicator, for ranking scholarly journals based on citation weighting schemes and eigenvector centrality to be used in complex and heterogeneous citation networks…
The SNIP (source normalized impact per paper) indicator is an indicator of the citation impact of scientific journals. The indicator, introduced by Henk Moed in 2010, is included in Elsevier's Scopus database. The SNIP indicator uses a…
Since its first release in 2004, the CAS Journal Ranking, a ranking system of journals based on a citation impact indicator, has been widely used both in selecting journals when submitting manuscripts and conducting research evaluation in…
Purpose: Citation-based assessments of countries' research capabilities often misrepresent their ability to achieve breakthrough advancements. These assessments commonly classify Japan as a developing country, which contradicts its…
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…
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,…
Impact factors (and similar measures such as the Scimago Journal Rankings) suffer from two problems: (i) citation behavior varies among fields of science and therefore leads to systematic differences, and (ii) there are no statistics to…