Assessing impact and quality from local dynamics of citation networks

Journal of Informetrics

Volumn 6, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 111-120

  Roth, Camille ^a,b   Wu, Jiang ^c,d   Lozano, Sergi ^d  

^a ÉCOLE DES HAUTES ÉTUDES EN SCIENCES SOCIALES   (France)

^b Institut des Systèmes Complexes de Paris Ile de France ISC PIF   (France)

^c WUHAN UNIVERSITY   (China)

^d ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Bibliometrics; Citation dynamics; Citation networks; Qualitative assessment

Indexed keywords

EID: 80054990477     PISSN: 17511577     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2011.08.005     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Boerner K., Maru J.T., Goldstone R.L. The simultaneous evolution of author and paper networks. PNAS 2004, 101(Suppl 1):5266-5273.
2. Bornmann L., Daniel H.-D. Universality of citation distributions - a validation of Radicchi et al.'s relative indicator. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2009, 60.
3. Braun T., Glänzel W., Schubert A. On sleeping beauties, princes and other tales of citation distributions.. Research Evaluation 2010, 19(3):195-202.
4. Burrell Q.L. Are " sleeping beauties" to be expected?. Scientometrics 2005, 65:381-389.
5. Castellano C., Radicchi F. On the fairness of using relative indicators for comparing citation performance in different disciplines. Archivum Immunologiae et Therapiae Experimentalis 2009, 57(2):85-90.
6. Chen P., Xie H., Maslov S., Redner S. Finding scientific gems with Google's PageRank algorithm. Journal of Informetrics 2007, 1:8-15.
7. de Solla Price D.J. Networks of scientific papers. Science 1965, 149(3683):510-515.
8. de Solla Price D.J. A general theory of bibliometric and other cumulative advantage processes. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 1976, 27(5-6):292-306.
9. Egghe L. The Hirsch-index and related impact measures. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 2010, 44:65-114.
10. Garfield E. Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool?. Scientometrics 1979, 1(4):359-375.
11. Glänzel W., Garfield E. The myth of delayed recognition. The Scientist 2004, 18(11):8.
12. Glänzel W., Schlemmer B., Thijs B. Better late than never? On the chance to become highly cited only beyond the standard bibliometric time horizon. Scientometrics 2003, 58:571-586.
13. Glänzel W., Schubert A. Predictive aspects of a stochastic model for citation processes. Information Processing & Management 1995, 31:69-80.
14. Greenberg S. How citation distortions create unfounded authority: Analysis of a citation network. BMJ 2009, 339(2680).
15. Hu X., Rousseau R., Chen J. On the definition of forward and backward citation generations. Journal of Informetrics 2011, 5(1):27-36.
16. MacRoberts M.H., MacRoberts B.R. Problems of citation analysis. Scientometrics 1996, 36(3):435-444.
17. Menczer F. Evolution of document networks. PNAS 2004, 101(S1):5261-5265.
18. Radicchi F., Fortunato S., Castellano C. Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact. PNAS 2008, 105:17268-17272.
19. Redner S. How popular is your paper? An empirical study of the citation distribution. European Physical Journal B 1998, 4:131.
20. Seglen P.O. The skewness of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 1992, 43(9):628-638.
21. The PLoS Medicine Editors The impact factor game. PLoS Medicine 2006, 3(6):e291.
22. van Raan A.F.J. Sleeping beauties in science. Scientometrics 2004, 467-472.
23. Wallace M.L., Larivière V., Gingras Y. Modeling a century of citation distributions. Journal of Informetrics 2009, 3(4):296-303.
24. Zitt M., Ramanana-Rahary S., Bassecoulard E. Relativity of citation performance and excellence measures: From cross-field to cross-scale effects of field-normalisation. Scientometrics 2005, 63:373-401.