Characterization of the Impact of Sets of Scientific Papers: The Garfield (Impact) Factor

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 55, Issue 5, 2004, Pages 431-435

  Vinkler, Peter ^a  

^a CHEMICAL RESEARCH CENTER   (Hungary)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

APPROXIMATION THEORY; ELECTRONIC PUBLISHING; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL SYSTEMS; INFORMATION SERVICES; INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PROBABILITY; SET THEORY;

GARFIELD FACTORS (GF); SPECIFIC IMPACT CONTRIBUTIONS (SIC);

INFORMATION SCIENCE;

EID: 1542335648     PISSN: 15322882     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.10391     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Amin, M., & Mabe, M. (2000). Impact factors: Use and abuse. Perspectives in Publishing, 1, 1-6.
2. Egghe, L., & Rousseau, R. (1996). Averaging and globalising quotients of informetric and scientometric data. Journal of Information Science, 22, 165-170.
3. Garfield, E. (1979). Citation indexing. Its theory and application in science, technology and humanities. New York: Wiley.
4. Garfield, E., & Sher, I.H. (1963). New factors in the evaluation of scientific literature through citation indexing. American Documentation, 14, 195201.
5. Glänzel, W., & Moed, H. (Eds.). (2002). Journal impact measures, selected papers of the special day session at the 8th international conference on scientometrics and informetrics. Scientometrics, 53(2), 169-280.
6. Klaič, B. (1999). The use of scientometric parameters for the evaluation of scientific contributions. Collection of Antropology, 23, 751-770.
7. Rousseau, R. (1992). Why am I not cited or why are multi-authored papers more cited then others? Journal of Documentation, 48, 79-80.
8. Schubert, A., & Glänzel, W. (1983). Statistical reliability of comparisons based on the citation impact of scientific publications. Scientometrics, 5, 59-74.
9. Seglen, P.O. (1992). The skewness of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 43, 628-638.
10. Seglen, P.O. (1997). Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. British Medical Journal, 314, 498-502.
11. Vinkler, P. (1988). An attempt for surveying and classifying bibliometric indicators for scientometric purposes. Scientometrics, 13, 239-259.
12. Vinkler, P. (1998). Comparative investigation of frequency and strength of motives toward referencing. The reference threshold model. Scientometrics, 43, 107-127.
13. Vinkler, P. (1999). Letter to the editor. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50, 958.
14. Vinkler, P. (2000). Evaluation of the publication activity of research teams by means of scientometric indicators. Current Science, 79, 602-612.
15. Vinkler, P. (2000). Publication velocity, publication growth and impact factor. An empirical model. In B. Cronin, & H.B. Atkins (Eds.), The web of knowledge. ASIS Monograph Series (pp. 163-176). Medford, NJ: Information Today Inc.
16. Vinkler, P. (2001). An attempt for defining some basic categories of scientometrics and classifying the indicators of evaluative scientometrics. Scientometrics, 50, 539-544.
17. Vinkler, P. (2002). Dynamic changes in the chance for citedness. Scientometrics, 54, 421-434.
18. Vinkler, P. (2002). Subfield problems in applying the Garfield (impact) Factors in practice. Scientometrics, 53, 267-279.