The case of scientometricians with the " absolute relative" impact indicator

Journal of Informetrics

Volumn 6, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 254-264

  Vinkler, Péter ^a  

^a CHEMICAL RESEARCH CENTER   (Hungary)

Author keywords

" crown" indicator; Relative citation rate; Relative impact indicator; Relative subfield citedness

Indexed keywords

EID: 84857011272     PISSN: 17511577     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2011.12.004     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Aksnes D.W. Characteristics of highly cited papers. Research Evaluation 2003, 12:159-170.
2. Aksnes D.W., Taxt R.E. Peer reviews and bibliometric indicators: A comparative study at a Norwegian University. Research Evaluation 2004, 13:33-41.
3. Bornmann L. Letter to the Editor: Towards an ideal method of measuring research performance: Some comments to the Opthof and Leydesdorff (2010) paper. Journal of Informetrics 2010, 4:441-443.
4. Bornmann L., Mutz R. Letter to the Editor: Further steps towards an ideal method of measuring citation performance: The avoidance of citation (ratio) averages in field-normalization. Journal of Informetrics 2011, 5:228-230.
5. Bornmann L., Mutz R., Hug S.E., Daniel H.-D. A multilevel meta-analysis of studies reporting correlations between the h index and 37 different h index variants. Journal of Informetrics 2011, 5:346-359.
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, 8:93-102.
7. Braun T., Glänzel W., Schubert A. Scientometric indicators. A 32-country comparative evaluation of publishing performance and citation impact 1985, World Scientific, Singapore-Philadelphia.
8. Egghe L. Theory and practice of the g-index. Scientometrics 2006, 69:131-152.
9. Egghe L., Rousseau R. Averaging and globalising quotients of informetric and scientometric data. Journal of Information Science 1996, 22:165-170.
10. Egghe L., Rousseau R. A general framework for relative impact indicators. The Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science 2002/2003, 27:29-48.
11. Toward a metric of science: The advent of science indicators 1977, 39-68. John Wiley & Sons, New York. Y. Elkana, J. Lederberg, R.K. Merton, A. Thackray, H. Zuckerman (Eds.).
12. Gingras Y., Larivière V. Letter to the Editor: There are neither " king" nor " crown" in scientometrics: Comments on a supposed " alternative" method of normalization. Journal of Informetrics 2011, 5:226-227.
13. Glänzel W., Thijs B., Schubert A., Debackere K. Subfield-specific normalized relative indicators and a new generation of relational charts: Methodological foundations illustrated on the assessment of institutional research performance. Scientometrics 2009, 78:165-188.
14. Hirsch J.E. An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2005, 102:16569-16572.
15. Larivière V., Gingras Y. Averages of ratios vs. ratios of averages: An empirical analysis of four levels of aggregation. Journal of Informetrics 2011, 5:392-399.
16. Leydesdorff L., Opthof T. Remaining problems with the " new crown indicator" (MNCS) of the CWTS. Journal of Informetrics 2011, 5:224-225.
17. Lundberg J. Lifting the crown-citation Z-score. Journal of Informetrics 2007, 1:145-154.
18. Moed H.F. Letter to the Editor: CWTS crown indicator measures citation impact of a research group's publication oeuvre. Journal of Informetrics 2010, 4:436-438.
19. Moed H.F., Burger W.J.M., Frankfort J.G., van Raan A.F. The application of bibliometric indicators: Important field- and time-dependent factors to be considered. Scientometrics 1985, 8:177-203.
20. Moed H.F., Burger W.J.M., Frankfort J.G., van Raan A.F. The use of bibliometric data for the measurement of university research performance. Research Policy 1985, 14:131-149.
21. Moravcsik M.J. Some contextual problems of science indicators. Handbook of quantitative studies of science and technology 1988, 11-30. Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam. A.F.J. van Raan (Ed.).
22. Opthof T., Leydesdorff L. Caveats for the journal and field normalizations in the CWTS (" Leiden" ) evaluations of research performance. Journal of Informetrics 2010, 4:423-430.
23. Plomp R. The significance of the number of highly cited papers as an indicator of scientific prolificacy. Scientometrics 1990, 19:185-197.
24. Schreiber M. An empirical investigation of the g-index for 26 physicists in comparison with the h-index, and a-index, and the r-index. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2008, 59:1513-1522.
25. Schubert A., Braun T. Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact. Scientometrics 1986, 9:281-291.
26. Spaan J.A.E. Letter to the Editor: The danger of pseudoscience in Informetrics. Journal of Informetrics 2010, 4:439-440.
27. van Raan A.F.J. Measuring science. Capita selecta of current main issues. Handbook of quantitative science and technology research. The use of publication and patent statistics in studies of S&T systems 2004, 19-50. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. H.F. Moed, W. Glänzel, U. Schmoch (Eds.).
28. van Raan A.F.J., van Leeuwen T.N., Visser M.S., van Eck N.J., Waltman L. Rivals for the crown: Reply to Opthof and Leydesdorff. Journal of Informetrics 2010, 4:431-435.
29. Vinkler P. Evaluation of some methods for the relative assessment of scientific publications. Scientometrics 1986, 10:157-177.
30. Vinkler P. Model for quantitative selection of relative scientometric impact indicators. Scientometrics 1996, 36:223-226.
31. Vinkler P. Subfield problems in applying the Garfield (Impact) Factors in practice. Scientometrics 2002, 53:267-279.
32. Vinkler P. Relations of relative scientometric indicators. Scientometrics 2003, 58:687-694.
33. Vinkler P. Characterization of the impact of sets of scientific papers: The Garfield (Impact) Factor. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2004, 55:431-435.
34. Vinkler P. Composite scientometric indicators for evaluating publications of research institutes. Scientometrics 2006, 68:629-642.
35. Vinkler P. The π-index: A new indicator for assessing scientific impact. Journal of Information Science 2009, 35:602-612.
36. Vinkler P. The evaluation of research by scientometric indicators 2010, Chandos Publishing, Cambridge.
37. v-index: A new indicator to characterize the impact of journals. Scientometrics 2010, 82:461-475.
38. Vinkler P. Scientometrics and scientometricians in 2011. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2011, 62:1430-1432.
39. Vinkler P. Application of the distribution of citations among publications in scientometric evaluations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2011, 62:1963-1978.
40. Waltman L., van Eck N.J., van Leeuwen T.N., Visser M.S., van Raan A.F.J. Towards a new crown indicator: An empirical analysis. Scientometrics 2011, 87:467-481.
41. Waltman L., van Eck N.J., van Leeuwen T.N., Visser M.S., van Raan A.F.J. Towards a new crown indicator: Some theoretical considerations. Journal of Informetrics 2011, 5:37-47.