Ranking national research systems by citation indicators. A comparative analysis using whole and fractionalised counting methods

Journal of Informetrics

Volumn 6, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 36-43

  Aksnes, Dag W ^a   Schneider, Jesper W ^b   Gunnarsson, Magnus ^c  

^a NORDIC INSTITUTE FOR STUDIES IN INNOVATION   (Norway)

^b ROYAL SCHOOL OF LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SCIENCE   (Denmark)

^c Department of Research Policy Analysis ^*  (Sweden)

Author keywords

Bibliometric methods; Citation indicators; International co authorship

Indexed keywords

EID: 80055016139     PISSN: 17511577     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2011.08.002     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Aksnes D.W. A macro study of self-citation. Scientometrics 2003, 56(2):235-246.
2. Aksnes D.W., Olsen T.B., Seglen P.O. Validation of bibliometric indicators in the field of microbiology. A Norwegian case study. Scientometrics 2000, 49(1):7-22.
3. Egghe L., Rousseau R., van Hooydonk G. Methods for accrediting publications to authors or countries: Consequences for evaluation studies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science (JASIS) 2000, 51(2):145-157.
4. Galam S. Tailor based allocations for multiple authorship: A fractional gh-index 2011, Retrieved July 14, 2011. arxiv:1007.3708v2.
5. Garfield E. Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool?. Scientometrics 1979, 1(4):359-375.
6. Gauffriau M., Larsen P.O. Counting methods are decisive for rankings based on publication and citation studies. Scientometrics 2005, 64(1):85-93.
7. Glänzel W. Science in Scandinavia: A bibliometric approach. Scientometrics 2000, 48(2):121-150.
8. Harsanyi M.A. Multiple authors, multiple problems - Bibliometrics and the study of scholarly collaboration: A literature review. Library and Information Science Research 1993, 15:325-354.
9. Herbertz H. Does it pay to cooperate? A bibliometric case study in molecular biology. Scientometrics 1995, 33(1):117-122.
10. van Hooydonk G. Fractional counting of multiauthored publications: Consequences for the impact of author. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 1997, 48(10):944-945.
11. Hurt C.D. Conceptual citation differences in science, technology, and social sciences literature. Information Processing & Management 1987, 23:1-6.
12. Irvine J., Martin B., Peacock T., Turner R. Charting the decline in British science. Nature 1985, 316(6029):587-590.
13. Kronman U., Gunnarsson M., Karlsson S. The bibliometric database at the Swedish Research Council - Contents, methods and indicators 2010, Swedish Research Council, Stockholm.
14. Leydesdorff L. Problems with the " measurement" of national scientific performance. Science and Public Policy 1988, 15(3):149-152.
15. Leydesdorff L., Bornmann L. How fractional counting of citations affects the impact factor: Normalization in terms of differences in citation potentials among fields of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2011, 62(2):217-229.
16. Leydesdorff L., Opthof T. Scopus's source normalized impact per paper (SNIP) versus a journal impact factor based on fractional counting of citations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2010, 61(11):2365-2369.
17. Lundberg J. Lifting the crown - Citation z-score. Journal of Informetrics 2007, 1(2):145-154.
18. Martin B.R. British science in the 1980s - Has the relative decline continued?. Scientometrics 1994, 29(1):27-56.
19. Moed H.F. Citation analysis in research evaluation 2005, Springer, Dordrecht.
20. 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.
21. Narin F. Evaluative bibliometrics: The use of publication and citation analysis in the evaluation of scientific activity 1976, Computer Horizons, Inc.
22. National Science Board Science and Engineering Indicators - 2010 2010, National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA.
23. Nordforsk. (2010a). International Research Cooperation in the Nordic Countries. A publication from the NORIA-net " The use of bibliometrics in research policy and evaluation activities" Ed. Gunnarsson, M. Oslo: NordForsk.
24. Nordforsk. (2010b). Bibliometric Research Performance Indicators for the Nordic Countries. A publication from the NORIA-net " The use of bibliometrics in research policy and evaluation activities" Ed. Schneider, J. W. Oslo: NordForsk.
25. Nordforsk. (2011). Comparing Research at Nordic Universities using Bibliometric Indicators. A publication from the NORIA-net " Bibliometric Indicators for the Nordic Universities" Ed. Piro, F. Oslo: NordForsk.
26. Opthof T., Leydesdorff L. Caveats for the journal and field normalizations in the CWTS (" Leiden" ) evaluations of research performance. Journal of Informetrics 2010, 4(3):423-430.
27. Persson O., Glänzel W., Danell R. Inflationary bibliometric values: The role of scientific collaboration and the need for relative indicators in evaluative studies. Scientometrics 2004, 60(3):421-432.
28. Price D.d.S. Letter to the editor. Science 1981, 212:987.
29. van Raan A.F.J. The influence of international collaboration on the impact of research results. Scientometrics 1998, 42(3):423-428.
30. van Raan A.F.J. The Pandora's Box of citation analysis: Measuring scientific excellence - The last evil?. The web of knowledge. A Festschrift in Honor of Eugene Garfield 2000, 301-319. ASIS, Medford. B. Cronin, H.B. Atkins (Eds.).
31. Schubert A., Braun T. Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact. Scientometrics 1986, 9(5-6):281-291.
32. Schubert A., Braun T. Cross-field normalization of scientometric indicators. Scientometrics 1996, 36(3):311-324.
33. Schubert A., Glänzel W., Braun T. Against absolute methods: Relative scientometric indicators and relational charts as evaluation tools. Handbook of quantitative studies of science and technology 1988, Elsevier, Amsterdam. A.F.J. van Raan (Ed.).
34. Vinkler P. Evaluation of some methods for the relative assessment of scientific publications. Scientometrics 1986, 10(3-4):157-177.
35. Waltman L., van Eck N.J., Leeuwen T.N., Visser M.S., van Raan A.F.J. Towards a new crown indicator: Some theoretical considerations. Journal of Informetrics 2010, 5(1):37-47.
36. Zitt M. Citing-side normalization of journal impact: A robust variant of the audience factor. Journal of Informetrics 2010, 4(3):392-406.
37. Zitt M., Small H. Modifying the journal impact factor by fractional citation weighting: The audience factor. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (JASIST) 2008, 59(11):1856-1860.