Caveats for the journal and field normalizations in the CWTS (" Leiden" ) evaluations of research performance

Journal of Informetrics

Volumn 4, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 423-430

  Opthof, Tobias ^a,b   Leydesdorff, Loet ^c  

^a ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Citation; Evaluation; Normalization; Research performance

Indexed keywords

EID: 77956487181     PISSN: 17511577     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2010.02.003     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. AMC Research Council Advice. (2009). Advice of the Research Council on the evaluation of the AMC research 2008. Amsterdam: AMC.
2. Bensman S.J. Garfield and the impact factor. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 2007, 41(1):93-155.
3. Bensman S.J., Leydesdorff L. Definition and identification of journals as bibliographic and subject entities: Librarianship vs. ISI Journal Citation Reports (JCR) Methods and their effect on citation measures. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2009, 60(6):1097-1117.
4. 0 at the micro level using data from chemistry. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2009, 60(8):1664-1670.
5. Bornmann L., Leydesdorff L., Van den Besselaar P. A meta-evaluation of scientific research proposals: Different ways of comparing rejected to awarded applications. Journal of Informetrics 2010, 4(3):211-220.
6. Bornmann L., Mutz R., Neuhaus C., Daniel H.D. Citation counts for research evaluation: Standards of good practice for analyzing bibliometric data and presenting and interpreting results. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics (ESEP) 2008, 8(1):93-102.
7. Boyack K.W., Klavans R., Börner K. Mapping the backbone of science. Scientometrics 2005, 64(3):351-374.
8. Bradford S.C. Sources of information on specific subjects. Engineering 1934, 137:85-86.
9. CWTS. (2008). AMC-specifieke CWTS-analyse 1997-2006. Leiden: CWTS [access via AMC intranet; unpublished, confidential].
10. Garfield E. The mystery of the transposed journal lists-Wherein Bradford's Law of Scattering is generalized according to Garfield's Law of Concentration. Current Contents 1971, 3(33):5-6.
11. Garfield E. Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation. Science 1972, 178(4060):471-479.
12. Glänzel W. Publication dynamics and citation impact: A multi-dimensional approach to scientometric research evaluation. Representations of science and technology. Proceedings of the international conference on science and technology indicators 1992, 209-224. DSWO/Leiden University Press, Leiden. P. Weingart, R. Sehringer, M. Winterhagen (Eds.).
13. Griffith B., Small H., Stonehil J., Dey S. Structure of scientific literatures. II. Toward a macrostructure and microstructure for science. Science Studies 1974, 4(4):339-365.
14. Laloë F., Mosseri R. Bibliometric evaluation of individual researchers: Not even right... not even wrong!. Europhysics News 2009, 40(5):26-29.
15. Leydesdorff L. Relations among science indicators. I. The Static Model. Scientometrics 1990, 18:281-307.
16. Leydesdorff, L. (1995). The Static Model. The challenge of scientometrics: The development, measurement, and self-organization of scientific communications. Leiden: DSWO Press, Leiden University. http://www.universal-publishers.com/book.php%3Fmethod=ISBN%26book=1581126816.
17. Leydesdorff L. Caveats for the use of citation indicators in research and journal evaluation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2008, 59(2):278-287.
18. Leydesdorff L., Bensman S.J. Classification and Powerlaws: The logarithmic transformation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2006, 57(11):1470-1486.
19. Leydesdorff L., Rafols I. A global map of science based on the ISI subject categories. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2009, 60(2):348-362.
20. Moed H.F., Burger W.J.M., Frankfort J.G., Van Raan A.F.J. The use of bibliometric data for the measurement of university research performance. Research Policy 1985, 14:131-149.
21. Moed H.F., De Bruin R.E., Van Leeuwen T.N. New bibliometric tools for the assessment of national research performance: Database description, overview of indicators and first applications. Scientometrics 1995, 33(3):381-422.
22. Moed H.F., Van Leeuwen T.N. Impact factors can mislead. Nature 1996, 381(6579):186.
23. Plomp R. The significance of the number of highly cited papers as an indicator of scientific prolificacy. Scientometrics 1990, 19(3):185-197.
24. Pudovkin A.I., Garfield E. Algorithmic procedure for finding semantically related journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2002, 53(13):1113-1119.
25. Pudovkin, A. I., & Garfield, E. (in press). Percentile rank and author superiority indexes for evaluating individual journal articles and the author's overall citation performance. CollNet Journal.
26. Radicchi F., Fortunato S., Castellano C. Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2008, 105(45):17268.
27. Rafols I., Leydesdorff L. Content-based and algorithmic classifications of journals: Perspectives on the dynamics of scientific communication and indexer effects. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2009, 60(9):1823-1835.
28. Rousseau R. Median and percentile impact factors: A set of new indicators. Scientometrics 2005, 63(3):431-441.
29. Schubert A., Braun T. Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact. Scientometrics 1986, 9(5):281-291.
30. Small H. Cited documents as concept symbols. Social Studies of Science 1978, 7:113-122.
31. Van Raan A.F.J. Comparison of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judgment for 147 chemistry research groups. Scientometrics 2006, 67(3):491-502.
32. Vinkler P. Evaluation of some methods for the relative assessment of scientific publications. Scientometrics 1986, 10(3):157-177.
33. Vinkler P. Relations of relative scientometric impact indicators. The relative publication strategy index. Scientometrics 1997, 40(1):163-169.
34. Wu, H. (2007). " Order of operations" and other oddities in school mathematics. (Accessed on March 24, 2010). http://math.berkeley.edu/~wu/order5.pdf.