相关论文: Comprehensive indicator comparisons intelligible t…

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…

This paper is a reply to the article "Scopus's Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) versus a Journal Impact Factor based on Fractional Counting of Citations", published by Loet Leydesdorff and Tobias Opthof (arXiv:1004.3580v2 [cs.DL]).…

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…

This paper explores a new indicator of journal citation impact, denoted as source normalized impact per paper (SNIP). It measures a journal's contextual citation impact, taking into account characteristics of its properly defined subject…

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,…

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.…

Bibliometric indicators such as journal impact factors, h-indices, and total citation counts are algorithmic artifacts that can be used in research evaluation and management. These artifacts have no meaning by themselves, but receive their…

In recent years, several Scientometrics and Bibliometrics indicators were proposed to evaluate the scientific impact of individuals, institutions, colleges, universities and research teams. The h-index gives a major breakthrough in the…

Recently, the integrated impact indicator (I3) indicator was introduced where citations are weighted in accordance with the percentile rank class of each publication in a set of publications. I3 can also be used as a field-normalized…

Citation impact indicators nowadays play an important role in research evaluation, and consequently these indicators have received a lot of attention in the bibliometric and scientometric literature. This paper provides an in-depth review…

The modified SNIP indicator of Elsevier, as recently explained by Waltman et al. (2013) in this journal, solves some of the problems which Leydesdorff & Opthof (2010 and 2011) indicated in relation to the original SNIP indicator (Moed, 2010…

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)…

Navigating the vast and rapidly increasing sea of academic publications to identify institutional synergies, benchmark research contributions and pinpoint key research contributions has become an increasingly daunting task, especially with…

The h-index is a popular bibliometric indicator for assessing individual scientists. We criticize the h-index from a theoretical point of view. We argue that for the purpose of measuring the overall scientific impact of a scientist (or some…

The launching of Scopus and Google Scholar, and methodological developments in Social Network Analysis have made many more indicators for evaluating journals available than the traditional Impact Factor, Cited Half-life, and Immediacy Index…

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…

In bibliometrics, the association of "impact" with central-tendency statistics is mistaken. Impacts add up, and citation curves should therefore be integrated instead of averaged. For example, the journals MIS Quarterly and JASIST differ by…

Research accomplishment is usually measured by considering all citations with equal importance, thus ignoring the wide variety of purposes an article is being cited for. Here, we posit that measuring the intensity of a reference is crucial…

In research evaluation of single researchers, the assessment of paper and journal impact is of interest. High journal impact reflects the ability of researchers to convince strict reviewers, and high paper impact reflects the usefulness of…

The recently proposed Euclidean index offers a novel approach to measure the citation impact of academic authors, in particular as an alternative to the h-index. We test if the index provides new, robust information, not covered by existing…