相关论文: The misuse of the nonlinear field normalization me…
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,…
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…
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…
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…
Journal rankings are widely used and are often based on citation data in combination with a network perspective. We argue that some of these network-based rankings can produce misleading results. From a theoretical point of view, we show…
We present an empirical comparison between two normalization mechanisms for citation-based indicators of research performance. These mechanisms aim to normalize citation counts for the field and the year in which a publication was…
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…
In order to assess Microsoft Academic as a useful data source for evaluative bibliometrics it is crucial to know, if citation counts from Microsoft Academic could be used in common normalization procedures and whether the normalized scores…
It is widely recognized that citation counts for papers from different fields cannot be directly compared because different scientific fields adopt different citation practices. Citation counts are also strongly biased by paper age since…
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…
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,…
Although altmetrics and other web-based alternative indicators are now commonplace in publishers' websites, they can be difficult for research evaluators to use because of the time or expense of the data, the need to benchmark in order to…
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…
Citation count is a popular index for assessing scientific papers. However, it depends on not only the quality of a paper but also various factors, such as conventionality, team size, and gender. Here, we examine the extent to which the…
Statistical practice does not automatically follow methodological innovation. Regularization methods, widely advocated to reduce overfitting and stabilize inference, are readily available in modern software, but are not consistently used by…
Calculation of the log-normalizer is a major computational obstacle in applications of log-linear models with large output spaces. The problem of fast normalizer computation has therefore attracted significant attention in the theoretical…
Academic citations are widely used for evaluating research and tracing knowledge flows. Such uses typically rely on raw citation counts and neglect variability in citation types. In particular, citations can vary in their fidelity as…
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…
Ageing of publications, percentage of self-citations, and impact vary from journal to journal within fields of science. The assumption that citation and publication practices are homogenous within specialties and fields of science is…
Citation and publication profiles are gaining importance for the evaluation of top researchers when it comes to the appropriation of funding for excellence programs or career promotion judgments. Indicators like the Normalized Mean Citation…