Eigenfactor: Does the principle of repeated improvement result in better estimates than raw citation counts?

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 59, Issue 13, 2008, Pages 2186-2188

  Davis, Philip M ^a  

^a Department of Obstetrics Gynecology   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EVALUATION TOOLS; INSTITUTE FOR SCIENTIFIC INFORMATIONS; ITERATIVE ALGORITHMS; PAGERANK ALGORITHMS;

DIFFRACTIVE OPTICAL ELEMENTS;

EID: 55349146272     PISSN: 15322882     EISSN: 15322890     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.20943     Document Type: Article

References (9)

1. Bergstrom, C. (2007a). eigenfactor.org. Retrieved April 15, 2008, from http://eigenfactor.org
2. Bergstrom, C. (2007b). Eigenfactor: Measuring the value and prestige of scholarly journals. C&RL News, 68(5).
3. Brin, S., & Page, L. (1998, Apr). The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual web search engine. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the seventh international conference on World Wide Web 7, Brisbane, Australia. Retrieved July 29, 2008, from http://dbpubs.stanford.edu/pub/1998-8
4. Cronin, B. (1984). The citation process: The role and significance of citations in scientific communication. London: Taylor Graham.
5. Garfield, E. (1955). Citation indexes for science. Science, 122(3159), 108-111.
6. Merton, R. K. (1988). The Matthew effect in science, II: Cumulative advantage and the symbolism of intellectual property. Isis, 79(4), 606-623.
7. Pinski, G., & Narin, F. (1976). Citation influence for journal aggregates of scientific publications: Theory, with application to the literature of physics. Information Processing and Management, 12(5), 297-312.
8. Price, D. J. S. (1965). Networks of scientific papers. Science, 149(3683), 510-515.
9. Seglen, P. O. (1992). The skewness of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43(9), 628-638.