Journal of Informetrics, Vol 5, Issue 1, 2011
Eugene Garfield
garfield at CODEX.CIS.UPENN.EDU
Sat Mar 26 15:52:36 EDT 2011
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE: The measurement of low- and high-impact in citation
distributions: Technical results (Article, English)
AUTHOR: Albarran, P; Ortuno, I; Ruiz-Castillo, J
SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (1). JAN 2011. p.48-63
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM
KEYWORDS: Research performance; Citation distribution; Poverty
measurement; Impact indicators
KEYWORDS+: RANKING SCIENTIFIC INSTITUTIONS; RESEARCH
PERFORMANCE;
CHARACTERISTIC SCORES; BIBLIOMETRIC TOOLS; POVERTY
INDEXES; BASIC RESEARCH; INDICATORS; SCIENCE; EXCELLENCE;
INEQUALITY
ABSTRACT: This paper introduces a novel methodology for comparing
the citation distributions of research units of a certain size working in the same
homogeneous field. Given a critical citation level (CCL), we suggest using two
real valued indicators to describe the shape of any
distribution: a high-impact and a low-impact measure defined over the set of
articles with citations above or below the CCL. The key to this methodology is
the identification of a citation distribution with an income distribution. Once this
step is taken, it is easy to realize that the measurement of low-impact
coincides with the measurement of economic poverty. In turn, it is equally
natural to identify the measurement of high-impact with the measurement of a
certain notion of economic affluence. On the other hand, it is seen that the
ranking of citation distributions according to a family of low-impact measures is
essentially characterized by a number of desirable axioms. Appropriately
redefined, these same axioms lead to the selection of an equally convenient
class of decomposable high-impact measures. These two families are shown to
satisfy other interesting properties that make them potentially useful in
empirical applications, including the comparison of research units working in
different fields. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
AUTHOR ADDRESS: J Ruiz-Castillo, Univ Carlos III, Dept Econ, Madrid 128,
E-28903 Getafe, Spain
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE: Structured evaluation of the scientific output of
academic research groups by recent h-based indicators (Article,
English)
AUTHOR: Franceschini, F; Maisano, D
SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (1). JAN 2011. p.64-74
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM
KEYWORDS: Bibliometric positioning; h-Index; h-Spectrum; Successive
h-indices; Ch-index; Research evaluation; Academic
research group; Scientific production
KEYWORDS+: BIBLIOMETRIC INDICATORS; HIRSCH-INDEX; RANKING;
INSTITUTIONS; PERFORMANCE; UNIVERSITIES
ABSTRACT: Evaluating the scientific output of researchers, research
institutions, academic departments and even universities is a challenging issue.
To do this, bibliometric indicators are helpful tools, more and more familiar to
research and governmental institutions.
This paper proposes a structured method to compare academic research groups
within the same discipline, by means of some Hirsch (h) based bibliometric
indicators. Precisely, five different typologies of indicators are used so as to
depict groups' bibliometric positioning within the scientific community. A specific
analysis concerning the Italian researchers in the scientific sector of Production
Technology and Manufacturing Systems is developed. The analysis is supported
by empirical data and can be extended to research groups associated to other
scientific sectors. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
AUTHOR ADDRESS: F Franceschini, Politecn Torino, DISPEA, Corso Duca Abruzzi
24, I-10129 Turin, Italy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE: Bibliometric rankings of journals based on Impact
Factors: An axiomatic approach (Article, English)
AUTHOR: Bouyssou, D; Marchant, T
SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (1). JAN 2011. p.75-86
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM
KEYWORDS: Bibliometrics; Journal rankings; Impact Factor; Expected
utility; Decision theory
KEYWORDS+: G-INDEX; CITATION ANALYSIS; STANDS TODAY; SCIENCE;
CONSEQUENCES; HISTORY; UTILITY; RISK; TOOL
ABSTRACT: This paper proposes an axiomatic analysis of Impact
Factors when used as tools for ranking journals. This analysis draws on the
similarities between the problem of comparing distribution of citations among
papers and that of comparing probability distributions on consequences as
commonly done in decision theory. Our analysis singles out a number of
characteristic properties of the ranking based on Impact Factors. We also
suggest alternative ways of using distributions of citations to rank order
journals. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
AUTHOR ADDRESS: D Bouyssou, CNRS LAMSADE, FRE3234, F-75775 Paris 16,
France
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE: Indicators of the interdisciplinarity of journals:
Diversity, centrality, and citations (Article, English)
AUTHOR: Leydesdorff, L; Rafols, I
SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (1). JAN 2011. p.87-100
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM
KEYWORDS: Journal; Citation; Diversity; Interdisciplinarity;
Entropy; Centrality; Gini
KEYWORDS+: BETWEENNESS CENTRALITY; SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS;
MATHEMATICAL-
THEORY; IMPACT FACTOR; RANDOM-WALKS; SCIENCE;
COMMUNICATION; INDEX; TECHNOLOGY; ENTROPY
ABSTRACT: A citation-based indicator for interdisciplinarity has
been missing hitherto among the set of available journal indicators. In this
study, we investigate network indicators (betweenness centrality), unevenness
indicators (Shannon entropy, the Gini coefficient), and more recently proposed
Rao-Stirling measures for "interdisciplinarity." The latter index combines the
statistics of both citation distributions of journals (vector-based) and distances
in citation networks among journals (matrix-based). The effects of various
normalizations are specified and measured using the matrix of 8207 journals
contained in the Journal Citation Reports of the (Social) Science Citation Index
2008. Betweenness centrality in symmetrical (1-mode) cosine-normalized
networks provides an indicator outperforming betweenness in the asymmetrical
(2-mode) citation network. Among the vector-based indicators, Shannon
entropy performs better than the Gini coefficient, but is sensitive to size.
Science and Nature, for example, are indicated at the top of the list. The new
diversity measure provides reasonable results when (1 - cosine) is assumed as
a measure for the distance, but results using Euclidean distances were difficult
to interpret. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
AUTHOR ADDRESS: L Leydesdorff, Univ Amsterdam, ASCoR, Kloveniersburgwal
48, NL-1012 CX Amsterdam, Netherlands
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE: The effects and their stability of field normalization
baseline on relative performance with respect to citation impact: A
case
study of 20 natural science departments (Article, English)
AUTHOR: Colliander, C; Ahlgren, P
SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (1). JAN 2011. p.101-113
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM
KEYWORDS: Stability analysis; Field normalization baseline; Journal;
ISI/Thomson Reuters subject category; Essential Science
Indicators field; Citation impact
KEYWORDS+: CROSS-FIELD; INDICATORS; EXCELLENCE
ABSTRACT: In this paper we study the effects of field normalization
baseline on relative performance of 20 natural science departments in terms of
citation impact. Impact is studied under three baselines:
journal, ISI/Thomson Reuters subject category, and Essential Science
Indicators field. For the measurement of citation impact, the indicators item-
oriented mean normalized citation rate and Top-5% are employed. The results,
which we analyze with respect to stability, show that the choice of
normalization baseline matters. We observe that normalization against
publishing journal is particular. The rankings of the departments obtained when
journal is used as baseline, irrespective of indicator, differ considerably from the
rankings obtained when ISI/Thomson Reuters subject category or Essential
Science Indicators field is used. Since no substantial differences are observed
when the baselines Essential Science Indicators field and ISI/Thomson Reuters
subject category are contrasted, one might suggest that people without
access to subject category data can perform reasonable normalized citation
impact studies by combining normalization against journal with normalization
against Essential Science Indicators field. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights
reserved.
AUTHOR ADDRESS: C Colliander, Umea Univ, Dept Sociol, SE-90187 Umea,
Sweden
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE: How and where the TeraGrid supercomputing infrastructure
benefits science (Article, English)
AUTHOR: Bollen, J; Fox, G; Singhal, PR
SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (1). JAN 2011. p.114-121
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM
KEYWORDS+: INDEX
ABSTRACT: We investigate how the benefits of the TeraGrid
supercomputing infrastructure are distributed across the scientific community.
Do mostly high-impact scientists benefit from the TeraGrid?
Are some scientific domains more strongly represented than others in TeraGrid-
supported work? To answer these questions, we examine the relation between
TeraGrid usage and scientific impact for a set of scientists whose projects
relied to varying degrees on the TeraGrid infrastructure. For each scientist we
measure TeraGrid usage expressed in terms of allocated Service Units (SU) vs.
various indicators of their scientific impact such as the h-index, total citations,
and citations per article. Our results show a significant correlation between
scientific impact and TeraGrid usage. We furthermore examine the distribution
of TeraGrid-related publications across various scientific journals. A
superposition of these journals over an existing large-scale map of science
shows how TeraGrid-supported work is mostly concentrated in Physics and
Chemistry, with a lesser focus on biology. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights
reserved.
AUTHOR ADDRESS: J Bollen, Indiana Univ, Sch Informat & Comp, 919 E 10th St,
Bloomington, IN 47408 USA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE: High- and low-impact citation measures: Empirical
applications (Article, English)
AUTHOR: Albarran, P; Ortuno, I; Ruiz-Castillo, J
SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (1). JAN 2011. p.122-145
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM
KEYWORDS: Research evaluation; Citation distribution; Scientific
ranking; Impact indicators
KEYWORDS+: INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC COLLABORATION; BIBLIOMETRIC
ANALYSIS; COOPERATION; NATIONS; SCORES; SCALES
ABSTRACT: This paper contains the first empirical applications of a
novel methodology for comparing the citation distributions of research units
working in the same homogeneous field. The paper considers a situation in
which the world citation distribution in 22 scientific fields is partitioned into
three geographical areas: the U. S., the European Union (EU), and the rest of
the world (RW). Given a critical citation level (CCL), we suggest using two real
valued indicators to describe the shape of each area's distribution: a high-and
a low-impact measure defined over the set of articles with citations below or
above the CCL. It is found that, when the CCL is fixed at the 80th percentile of
the world citation distribution, the U. S. performs dramatically better than the
EU and the RW according to both indicators in all scientific fields. This
superiority generally increases as we move from the incidence to the intensity
and the citation inequality aspects of the phenomena in question. Surprisingly,
changes observed when the CCL is increased from the 80th to the 95th
percentile are of a relatively small order of magnitude. Finally, it is found that
international co-authorship increases the high-impact and reduces the low-
impact level in the three geographical areas. This is especially the case for the
EU and the RW when they cooperate with the U.S. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All
rights reserved.
AUTHOR ADDRESS: J Ruiz-Castillo, Univ Carlos III, Dept Econ, Madrid 128,
Getafe 28903, Spain
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE: An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing
the evolution of a research field: A practical application to the
Fuzzy
Sets Theory field (Article, English)
AUTHOR: Cobo, MJ; Lopez-Herrera, AG; Herrera-Viedma, E; Herrera,
F
SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (1). JAN 2011. p.146-166
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM
KEYWORDS: Science mapping; Co-word analysis; Bibliometric studies;
Fuzzy Sets Theory; Thematic evolution; h-Index
KEYWORDS+: CO-WORD ANALYSIS; SIMILARITY MEASURES; CITATION
ANALYSIS;
SCIENCE; MAPS; COCITATION; NETWORK; MODEL;
SCIENTOMETRICS;
SURFACTANTS
ABSTRACT: This paper presents an approach to analyze the thematic
evolution of a given research field. This approach combines performance
analysis and science mapping for detecting and visualizing conceptual
subdomains (particular themes or general thematic areas). It allows us to
quantify and visualize the thematic evolution of a given research field.
To do this, co-word analysis is used in a longitudinal framework in order to
detect the different themes treated by the research field across the given time
period. The performance analysis uses different bibliometric measures, including
the h-index, with the purpose of measuring the impact of both the detected
themes and thematic areas. The presented approach includes a visualization
method for showing the thematic evolution of the studied field.
Then, as an example, the thematic evolution of the Fuzzy Sets Theory field is
analyzed using the two most important journals in the topic:
Fuzzy Sets and Systems and IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems. (C) 2010
Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
AUTHOR ADDRESS: MJ Cobo, Univ Granada, Dept Comp Sci & Artificial
Intelligence, CITIC UGR Res Ctr Informat & Commun Technol,
E-18071 Granada, Spain
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE: Gender differences in peer reviews of grant applications:
A substantive-methodological synergy in support of the null
hypothesis
model (Article, English)
AUTHOR: Marsh, HW; Jayasinghe, UW; Bond, NW
SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (1). JAN 2011. p.167-180
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM
SEARCH TERM(S): WENNERAS C NATURE 387:341 1997;
ZUCKERMA.H MINERVA 9:66 1971;
ZUCKERMAN H rauth
KEYWORDS: Peer review; Gender differences; Multilevel cross-
classified models; Validity; Generalizability
KEYWORDS+: FEMALE COLLEGE-TEACHERS; STUDENTS VIEWS; SCIENCE;
RELIABILITY; WOMEN; BIAS; METAANALYSIS; ASSESSMENTS;
MANUSCRIPT; PSYCHOLOGY
ABSTRACT: Peer review serves a gatekeeper role, the final arbiter
of what is valued in academia, but is widely criticized in terms of potential
biases-particularly in relation to gender. In this substantive- methodological
synergy, we demonstrate methodological and multilevel statistical approaches
to testing a null hypothesis model in relation to the effect of researcher gender
on peer reviews of grant proposals, based on 10,023 reviews by 6233 external
assessors of 2331 proposals from social science, humanities, and science
disciplines. Utilizing multilevel cross-classified models, we show that support for
the null hypothesis model positing researcher gender has no significant effect
on proposal outcomes. Furthermore, these non-effects of gender generalize
over assessor gender (contrary to a matching hypothesis), discipline, assessors
chosen by the researchers themselves compared to those chosen by the
funding agency, and country of the assessor. Given the large, diverse sample,
the powerful statistical analyses, and support for generalizability, these results
- coupled with findings from previous research - offer strong support for the
null hypothesis model of no gender differences in peer reviews of grant
proposals. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
AUTHOR ADDRESS: HW Marsh, Univ Oxford, Dept Educ, 15 Norham Gardens,
Oxford OX2 6PY, England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE: A proposal for a First-Citation-Speed-Index (Article,
English)
AUTHOR: Egghe, L; Bornmann, L; Guns, R
SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (1). JAN 2011. p.181-186
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM
KEYWORDS: First-Citation-Speed-Index; FCSI; h-Index; Increasing
sequence
ABSTRACT: In this paper, we define a First-Citation-Speed-Index
(FCSI) for a set of papers, based on their times of publication and of first
citation. The index is based on the definition of a h-index for increasing
sequences.
We show that the index has several good properties in the sense that the
shorter the times are between publication and first citation (in a global
manner) the higher the FCSI is.
We present two case studies: a first-citation speed comparison of three
journals in the field of psychology and a first-citation speed comparison of
accepted and rejected, but published elsewhere manuscripts by the journal
Angewandte Chemie International Edition. Both case studies indicate that our
FCSI satisfies the intuitive feeling of what values a FCSI should have in these
cases. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
AUTHOR ADDRESS: L Egghe, Univ Hasselt, Campus Diepenbeek,Agoralaan, B-
3590
Diepenbeek, Belgium
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE: Scientific collaboration and endorsement: Network
analysis of coauthorship and citation networks (Article, English)
AUTHOR: Ding, Y
SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (1). JAN 2011. p.187-203
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM
KEYWORDS: Scientific collaboration; Scientific endorsement; Topic
modeling; Path-finding algorithm
KEYWORDS+: CO-AUTHORSHIP NETWORKS; INFORMATION-RETRIEVAL;
INTELLECTUAL STRUCTURE; COCITATION ANALYSIS; SOCIAL
NETWORKS; SCIENCE; IMPACT; COMMUNITIES; SEARCH
ABSTRACT: Scientific collaboration and endorsement are well-
established research topics which utilize three kinds of methods:
survey/questionnaire, bibliometrics, and complex network analysis. This paper
combines topic modeling and path-finding algorithms to determine whether
productive authors tend to collaborate with or cite researchers with the same
or different interests, and whether highly cited authors tend to collaborate with
or cite each other. Taking information retrieval as a test field, the results show
that productive authors tend to directly coauthor with and closely cite
colleagues sharing the same research interests; they do not generally
collaborate directly with colleagues having different research topics, but
instead directly or indirectly cite them; and highly cited authors do not
generally coauthor with each other, but closely cite each other. Published by
Elsevier Ltd.
AUTHOR ADDRESS: Y Ding, Indiana Univ, Sch Lib & Informat Sci, Bloomington,
IN 47405 USA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE: Are researchers that collaborate more at the
international level top performers? An investigation on the Italian
university system (Article, English)
AUTHOR: Abramo, G; D'Angelo, CA; Solazzi, M
SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (1). JAN 2011. p.204-213
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM
SEARCH TERM(S): PRICE DJD rauth
KEYWORDS: International research collaboration; Top scientist;
Research performance; Bibliometrics; Italy
KEYWORDS+: CO-AUTHORSHIPS; KNOWLEDGE; ORGANIZATION
ABSTRACT: The practice of collaboration, and particularly
international collaboration, is becoming ever more widespread in scientific
research, and is likewise receiving greater interest and stimulus from policy-
makers. However, the relation between research performance and degree of
internationalization at the level of single researchers still presents unresolved
questions. The present work, through a bibliometric analysis of the entire
Italian university population working in the hard sciences over the period 2001-
2005, seeks to answer some of these questions. The results show that the
researchers with top performance with respect to their national colleagues are
also those who collaborate more abroad, but that the reverse is not always
true. Also, interesting differences emerge at the sectorial level.
Finally, the effect of the nation involved in the international partnership plays a
role that should not be ignored. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
AUTHOR ADDRESS: G Abramo, Univ Roma Tor Vergata, Dipartimento Ingn
Impresa,
Via Politecn 1, I-00133 Rome, Italy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE: Strange attractors in the Web of Science database
(Article, English)
AUTHOR: Garcia-Perez, MA
SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (1). JAN 2011. p.214-218
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM
SEARCH TERM(S): HIRSCH JE P NATL ACAD SCI USA 102:16569 2005
KEYWORDS: Citation analysis; Scientometrics
KEYWORDS+: H-INDEX; GOOGLE SCHOLAR; OF-SCIENCE; SCOPUS;
CITATION;
PROS; CONS; CONSEQUENCES; COVERAGE
ABSTRACT: Accurate computation of h indices or other indicators of
research impact requires access to databases supplying complete and accurate
citation information. The Web of Science (WoS) database is widely used for
this purpose and it is generally deemed error-free. This note describes an
inaccuracy that seems to affect differentially non- English sources and targets
in WoS, namely, "phantom citations" (i.e., papers reported by WoS to cite some
article when they actually did not) and their concentration around particular
articles that are thus dubbed "strange attractors". The analysis of references in
(and citations to) papers in two English sources and two non-English sources
reveals that phantom citations and other errors of indexing occur about twice
as often with non-English items. These and other errors of commission affect
about 1% of the cited references in the WoS database, and they may reveal
large- scale problems in the reference matching algorithm in WoS. (C) 2010
Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
AUTHOR ADDRESS: MA Garcia-Perez, Univ Complutense, Dept Metodol, Fac
Psicol, Campus Somosaguas, Madrid 28223, Spain
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE: What's familiar is excellent: The impact of exposure
effect on perceived journal quality (Article, English)
AUTHOR: Serenko, A; Bontis, N
SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (1). JAN 2011. p.219-223
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM
KEYWORDS: Journal ranking; Stated preference; Exposure effect;
Familiarity effect
KEYWORDS+: KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT; ACADEMIC JOURNALS; RANKING
ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study is to test the existence of the
exposure effect in journal ranking decisions. The exposure effect emerges when
participants of journal ranking surveys assign higher scores to some journals
merely because they are more familiar with them rather than on their objective
assessment of the overall journal's contribution to the field. Analysis of the
journal ranking data from a survey of 233 active researchers in the field of
knowledge management and intellectual capital confirmed the existence of the
exposure effect. Specifically, it was found that: (1) those who previously
published in a particular journal rated it higher than those who did not; (2)
those who previously served as a reviewer or editor for a particular journal also
rated it higher than those who did not; and (3) a very strong correlation was
found between the respondents' perceptions of overall contribution of a journal
and the degree of their familiarity with this outlet. This investigation confirmed
a major limitation of the stated preference journal ranking approach that should
be taken into consideration in future research and results interpretation. (C)
2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
AUTHOR ADDRESS: A Serenko, Lakehead Univ, Fac Business Adm, 955 Oliver
Rd,
Thunder Bay, ON P7B 5E1, Canada
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE: Remaining problems with the "New Crown Indicator" (MNCS)
of the CWTS (Letter, English)
AUTHOR: Leydesdorff, L; Opthof, T
SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (1). JAN 2011. p.224-225
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM
SEARCH TERM(S): GARFIELD E rauth;
GARFIELD E SCIENTOMETRICS 1:359 1979;
PUDOVKIN AI J AM SOC INF SCI TEC 53:1113 2002;
LETTER* doctype
KEYWORDS+: JOURNAL-CITATION-REPORTS
AUTHOR ADDRESS: L Leydesdorff, Univ Amsterdam, Amsterdam Sch Commun
Res
ASCoR, Kloveniersburgwal 48, NL-1012 CX Amsterdam,
Netherlands
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE: There are neither "king" nor "crown" in scientometrics:
Comments on a supposed "alternative" method of normalization
(Letter,
English)
AUTHOR: Gingras, Y; Lariviere, V
SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (1). JAN 2011. p.226-227
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM
SEARCH TERM(S): SCIENTOMETRIC* item_title; LETTER* doctype
AUTHOR ADDRESS: V Lariviere, Univ Quebec, Observ Sci & Technol, Montreal,
PQ H3C 3P8, Canada
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE: Further steps towards an ideal method of measuring
citation performance: The avoidance of citation (ratio) averages in
field-
normalization (Letter, English)
AUTHOR: Bornmann, L; Mutz, R
SOURCE: JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS 5 (1). JAN 2011. p.228-230
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, AMSTERDAM
SEARCH TERM(S): CITATION item_title; CITATION* item_title;
LETTER* doctype
AUTHOR ADDRESS: L Bornmann, Max Planck Soc, Off Res Anal & Foresight,
Hofgartenstr 8, D-80539 Munich, Germany
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
More information about the SIGMETRICS
mailing list