Comparative rank assessment of journal articles

Journal of Informetrics

Volumn 7, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 712-717

  Vinkler, Péter ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE   (Hungary)

Author keywords

Elite set; Evaluation; Normalization by field; Normalization by size; Percentage Rank Position; Rank by citation rate

Indexed keywords

PUBLISHING;

ELITE SET; EVALUATION; NORMALIZATION BY FIELD; NORMALIZATION BY SIZE; PERCENTAGE RANK POSITION;

PAPER;

EID: 84880364729     PISSN: 17511577     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2013.04.006     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Bornmann L., Marx W. How good is research really? Measuring citation impact of publications with percentiles increases correct assessments and fair comparisons. EMBO Reports 2013, 14:226-230.
2. 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.
3. Castellano C., Radicchi F. On the fairness of using relative indicators for comparing citation performance in different disciplines. Archivum Immunologiae et Therapiae Experimentalis 2009, 57:85-90.
4. Cole S., Cole J.R. Social stratification in science 1973, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
5. Colliander C., Ahlgreen P. The effects and their stability of field normalization baseline on relative performance with respect to citation impact: A case study of 20 natural science departments. Journal of Informetrics 2011, 5:101-113.
6. Egghe L. Theory and practice of the g-index. Scientometrics 2006, 69:131-152.
7. Garfield E. Citation indexing: Its theory and application in science, technology, and humanities 1979, Wiley, New York.
8. Glänzel W. The application of characteristic scores and scales to the evaluation and ranking of scientific journals. Journal of Information Science 2011, 37:40-48.
9. Glänzel W., Thijs B. Using 'core documents' for the representation of clusters and topics. Scientometrics 2011, 88:297-309.
10. 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.
11. Jin B. H-index: An evaluation indicator proposed by scientist. Science Focus 2006, 1:8-9.
12. Jin B., Liang L., Rousseau R., Egghe L. The R- and AR-indices: Complementing the h-index. Chinese Science Bulletin 2007, 52:855-863.
13. Kosmulski M. Successful papers: A new idea in evaluation of scientific output. Journal of Informetrics 2011, 5:481-485.
14. Lundberg J. Lifting the crown - citation z-score. Journal of Informetrics 2007, 1:145-154.
15. de Solla Price D.J. Little science, big science 1963, Columbia University Press, New York.
16. Pudovkin A.I., Garfield E. Rank normalization of impact factors will resolve Vanclay's dilemma with TRIF. Scientometrics 2012, 92:409-412.
17. Radicchi F., Fortunato S., Castellano C. Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2008, 105:17268-17272.
18. Tague J. Rank and sizes: Some complementaries and contrasts. Journal of Information Science 1990, 16:29-35.
19. Viera E.S., Gomes J.A.N.F. Citations to scientific articles: Its distribution and dependence of the article features. Journal of Informetrics 2010, 4:1-13.
20. Vinkler P. The π-index: A new indicator for assessing scientific impact. Journal of Information Science 2009, 35:602-612.
21. Vinkler P. Introducing the current contribution index for characterizing the recent, relevant impact of journals. Scientometrics 2009, 79:409-420.
22. Vinkler P. The evaluation of research by scientometric indicators 2010, Chandos Publishing, Cambridge.
23. Vinkler P. The πv-index: A new indicator to characterize the impact of journals. Scientometrics 2010, 82:461-475.
24. 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.
25. Vinkler P. The case of scientometricians with the "absolute relative" impact indicator. Journal of Informetrics 2012, 6:254-264.
26. Wagner C.S., Leydesdorff L. An integrated impact indicator: A new definition of 'Impact' with policy relevance. Research Evaluation 2012, 2:183-188.
27. Wohlin C. A new index for the citation curve of researchers. Scientometrics 2009, 81:521-533.