Sub-field normalization in the multiplicative case: Average-based citation indicators

Journal of Informetrics

Volumn 6, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 543-556

  Herranz, Neus ^a   Ruiz Castillo, Javier ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSIDAD CARLOS III DE MADRID   (Spain)

Author keywords

Citation analysis; European paradox; Journal classification; Normalization; Research performance; Web of Science categories

Indexed keywords

EID: 84861170287     PISSN: 17511577     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2012.02.006     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Aksnes D., Schneider J., Gunnarsson M. Ranking national research systems by citation indicators. A comparative analysis using whole and fractionalised counting methods. Journal of Informetrics 2012, 6:36-43.
2. Albarrán P., Ruiz-Castillo J. References made and citations received by scientific articles. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2011, 62:40-49.
3. Albarrán P., Crespo J., Ortuño I., Ruiz-Castillo J. A comparison of the scientific performance of the U.S. and Europe at the turn of the 21st century. Scientometrics 2010, 85:329-344.
4. Albarrán P., Ortuño I., Ruiz-Castillo J. High- and low-impact citation measures: Empirical applications. Journal of Informetrics 2011, 5:122-145.
5. Albarrán P., Ortuño I., Ruiz-Castillo J. Average-based versus high- and low-impact indicators for the evaluation of citation distributions with. Research Evaluation 2011, 20:325-339.
6. Albarrán P., Crespo J., Ortuño I., Ruiz-Castillo J. The skewness of science in 219 sub-fields and a number of aggregates. Scientometrics 2011, 88:385-397.
7. Albarrán P., Ortuño I., Ruiz-Castillo J. The measurement of low- and high-impact in citation distributions: technical results. Journal of Informetrics 2011, 5:48-63.
8. Anderson J., Collins P., Irvine J., Isard P., Martin B., Narin F., et al. On-line approaches to measuring national scientific output: A cautionary tale. Science and Public Policy 1988, 15:153-161.
9. De Bruin R.E., Kint A., Luwel M., Moed H.F. A study of research evaluation and planning: The university of Ghent. Research Evaluation 1993, 3:25-41.
10. EC (1994). First European report on science and technology indicators, Directorate-General XII, Science, Research, and Development. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Community.
11. Glänzel W. Characteristic scores and scales: A bibliometric analysis of subject characteristics based on long-term citation observation. Journal of Informetrics 2007, 1:92-102.
12. Glänzel W., Schubert A. A new classification scheme of science fields and subfields designed for scientometric evaluation purposes. Scientometrics 2003, 56:357-367.
13. Herranz, N. & Ruiz-Castillo, J. (2011a). The end of the 'European Paradox', Working Paper 11-27, Universidad Carlos III. http://hdl.handle.net/10016/12195.
14. Herranz, N. & Ruiz-Castillo, J. (2011b), Sub-field normalization in the multiplicative case: Average-based citation indicators, Working Paper 11-30, Universidad Carlos III http://hdl.handle.net/10016/12290.
15. Herranz N., Ruiz-Castillo J. Multiplicative and fractional strategies when journals are assigned to several sub-fields. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2012, 10.1002/asi.22629.
16. Herranz N., Ruiz-Castillo J. Sub-field normalization in the multiplicative case: High- and low-impact citation indicators. Research Evaluation 2012, 10.1093/reeval/rvs006.
17. King D. The scientific impact of nations. Nature 2004, 430:311-316.
18. 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.
19. Lunberg J. Lifting the crown - Citation z-score. Journal of Informetrics 2007, 1:145-154.
20. May R. The scientific wealth of nations. Science 1997, 275:793-796.
21. Moed H.F., De Bruin R.E., van Leeuwen T. New bibliometrics tools for the assessment of national research performance: Database description, overview of indicators, and first applications. Scientometrics 1995, 133:381-422.
22. Opthof T., Leydesdorf L. Caveats for the journal and field normalizations in the CWTS (" Leiden" ) evaluations of research performance. Journal of Informetrics 2010, 4:423-430.
23. Schubert A., Glänzel W., Braun T. A new methodology for ranking scientific institutions. Scientometrics 1987, 12:267-292.
24. Seglen P. The skewness of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 1992, 43:628-638.
25. Tijssen, R., van Leeuwen, T. (2003). Bibliometric Analysis of World Science, Extended Technical Annex to Chapter V of Third European Report on Science and Technology Indicators, Directorate-General for Research. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Community http://www.cordis.lu/rtd2002/indicators/home.htlm.
26. 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.
27. 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.
28. 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.