A methodology for Institution-Field ranking based on a bidimensional analysis: The IFQ2A index

Scientometrics

Volumn 88, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 771-786

  Torres Salinas, Daniel ^a   Moreno Torres, Jose G ^b   Delgado López Cózar, Emilio ^b   Herrera, Francisco ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NAVARRA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GRANADA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Bibliometrics; Bidimensional analysis; Evaluation models; h index; Higher education; Rankings; Research performance assessment; Shanghai ranking; Universities

Indexed keywords

EID: 80051473286     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-011-0418-6     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Adler, N., & Harding, A.-W. (2009). When knowledge wins: Transcending the sense and nonsense of academic rankings. The Academy of Management Learning and Education, 8(1), 72-95.
2. Aguillo, I. F., Bar-Ilan, J., Levene, M., & Priego, J. L. O. (2010). Comparing university rankings. Scientometrics, 85(1), 243-256.
3. Aksnes, D. (2003). Characteristics of highly cited papers. Research Evaluation, 12, 159-170.
4. Aksnes, D., & Sivertsen, G. (2004). The effect of highly cited papers on national citation indicators. Scientometrics, 59, 213-224.
5. Alonso, S., Cabrerizo, F., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2009). h-Index: A review focused in its variants, computation and standardization for different scientific fields. Journal of Informetrics, 3(4), 273-289.
6. Billaut, J.-C., Bouyssou, D., & Vincke, P. (2010). Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking?: An MCDM view. Scientometrics, 84(1), 237-263.
7. Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H.-D. (2008). Selecting manuscripts for a high-impact journal through peer review: A citation analysis of communications that were accepted by Angewandte Chemie International Edition, or rejected but published elsewhere. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(11), 1841-1852.
8. Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H.-D. (2008). What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior. Journal of Documentation, 64(1), 45-80.
9. Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., & Daniel, H.-D. (2010). The h index research output measurement: Two approaches to enhance its accuracy. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 407-414.
10. Buela-Casal, G., Gutiérrez-Martínez, O., Bermúdez-Sánchez, M. P., & Vadillo-Muñoz, O. (2007). Comparative study of international academic rankings of universities. Scientometrics, 71(3), 349-365.
11. 2-Index: Quantitative and qualitative evaluation based on the number and impact of papers in the Hirsch core. Journal of Informetrics, 4(1), 23-28.
12. Dehon, C., McCathie, A., & Verardi, V. (2010). Uncovering excellence in academic rankings: A closer look at the Shanghai ranking. Scientometrics, 83(2), 515-524.
13. Dill, D. D., & Soo, M. (2005). Academic quality, league tables, and public policy: A cross-national analysis of university ranking systems. Higher Education 49, 495-533. doi: 10. 1007/s10734-004-1746-8.
14. Egghe, L. (2006). Theory and practise of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69(1), 131-152.
15. Elsevier B. V. Scopus. (2010). See http://www. scopus. co. Accessed Oct 2010.
16. Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 102(46), 16569-16572.
17. ISI Web of Science. Science Citation Index. See http://isiknowledge. co. Accessed Oct 2010.
18. Kosmulski, M. (2009). New seniority-independent Hirsch-type index. Journal of Informetrics, 3(4), 341-347.
19. Leydesdorff, L., & Opthof, T. (2010). Normalization, CWTS indicators, and the Leiden Rankings: Differences in citation behavior at the level of fields. http://www. leydesdorff. net/reply2cwts/reply2cwts. pd. Accessed Oct 2010.
20. Liu, N. C., & Cheng, Y. (2005). Academic ranking of world universities: Methodologies and problems. Higher Education in Europe 30(2), 127-136.
21. Moed, H. F. (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation. New York: Springer.
22. Moed, H. F. (2010). CWTS crown indicator measures citation impact of a research group's publication oeuvre. CoRR, abs/1003. 5884.
23. Price, D. J. D. S. (1965). Networks of scientific papers. Science, 149(3683), 510-515.
24. QS World University Rankings. (2010). http://www. topuniversities. com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/hom. Accessed Oct 2010.
25. SCImago Institutions Rankings. (2007). http://www. scimagoir. co. Accessed Oct 2010.
26. Shanghai Jiao Tong University. (2009). Academic ranking of world universities (ARWU). http://www. arwu. org/index. js. Accessed Oct 2010.
27. Sypsa, V., & Hatzakis, A. (2009). Assessing the impact of biomedical research in academic institutions of disparate sizes. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 9, 33-42.
28. Universiteit Leiden. (2010). Leiden university rankings. http://www. socialsciences. leiden. edu/cwts/products-services/leiden-ranking-2010-cwts. Accessed Oct 2010.
29. van Raan, A. F. J., van Leeuwen, T. N., Visser, M. S., van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Rivals for the crown: Reply to Opthof and Leydesdorff. Journal of Informetricx, 4(3), 431-435.
30. Vieira, E., & Gomes, J. (2010). A research impact indicator for institutions. Journal of Informetrics, 4(4), 581-590.