Field-normalized impact factors (IFs): A comparison of rescaling and fractionally counted IFs

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 64, Issue 11, 2013, Pages 2299-2309

  Leydesdorff, Loet ^a   Radicchi, Filippo ^b   Bornmann, Lutz ^c   Castellano, Claudio ^d,e   De Nooy, Wouter ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITAT ROVIRA I VIRGILI   (Spain)

^c MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE   (Germany)

^d ISC CNR   (Italy)

^e SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

Author keywords

evaluation; journals

Indexed keywords

ARITHMETIC MEAN; CITATION SCORE; EVALUATION; JOURNALS; NATIONAL SCIENCE BOARDS; REFERENCE LIST; SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING; SCIENCE CITATION INDEX;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE;

SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

EID: 84885675834     PISSN: 15322882     EISSN: 15322890     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.22911     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Albarrán, P., &, Ruiz-Castillo, J., (2011). References made and citations received by scientific articles. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62 (1), 40-49.
2. Bornmann, L., de Moya-Anegõn, F., &, Leydesdorff, L., (2012). The new excellence indicator in the World Report of the SCImago Institutions Rankings 2011. Journal of Informetrics, 6 (3), 333-335.
3. Bornmann, L., &, Leydesdorff, L., (2011). Which cities produce excellent papers worldwide more than can be expected? A new mapping approach-using Google Maps-based on statistical significance testing. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62 (10), 1954-1962.
4. Bornmann, L., &, Mutz, R., (2011). Further steps towards an ideal method of measuring citation performance: The avoidance of citation (ratio) averages in field-normalization. Journal of Informetrics, 5 (1), 228-230.
5. Braun, T., (2012). Editorial to a special issue on journal impact factors. Scientometrics, 92 (2), 207-208.
6. Garfield, E., (1972). Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation. Science, 178 (4060), 471-479.
7. Garfield, E., (1979). Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool? Scientometrics, 1 (4), 359-375.
8. Glänzel, W., &, Schubert, A., (1988). Characteristic scores and scales in assessing citation impact. Journal of Information Science, 14 (2), 123-127.
9. Kousha, K., Thelwall, M., &, Rezaie, S., (2011). Assessing the citation impact of books: The role of Google Books, Google Scholar, and Scopus. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 62 (11), 2147-2164.
10. Leydesdorff, L., (2012). Alternatives to the journal impact factor: I3 and the top-10% (or top-25%?) of the most-highly cited papers. Scientometrics, 92 (2), 355-365.
11. Leydesdorff, L., &, Bensman, S.J., (2006). Classification and Powerlaws: The logarithmic transformation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57 (11), 1470-1486.
12. Leydesdorff, L., &, Bornmann, L., (2011). How fractional counting 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, 62 (2), 217-229.
13. Leydesdorff, L., &, Bornmann, L., (2012). Testing differences statistically with the Leiden ranking. Scientometrics, 92 (3), 781-783.
14. Leydesdorff, L., Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., &, Opthof, T., (2011). Turning the tables in citation analysis one more time: Principles for comparing sets of documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62 (7), 1370-1381.
15. Leydesdorff, L., &, Felt, U., (2012). Edited volumes, monographs, and book chapters in the Book Citation Index (BKCI) and Science Citation Index (SCI, SoSCI, A&HCI). Journal of Scientometric Research, 1 (1), 28-34.
16. Leydesdorff, L., &, Opthof, T., (2010). Normalization at the field level: Fractional counting of citations. Journal of Informetrics, 4 (4), 644-646.
17. Leydesdorff, L., &, Shin, J.C., (2011). How to evaluate universities in terms of their relative citation impacts: Fractional counting of citations and the normalization of differences among disciplines. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62 (6), 1146-1155.
18. Leydesdorff, L., Zhou, P., &, Bornmann, L., (2013). How can impact factors be normalized across fields of science? An assessment in terms of percentile ranks and fractional counts. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64 (1), 96-107.
19. Lozano, G.A., Larivière, V., &, Gingras, Y., (2012). The weakening relationship between the impact factor and papers' citations in the digital age. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63 (11), 2140-2145.
20. Moed, H.F., (2010). Measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals. Journal of Informetrics, 4 (3), 265-277.
21. National Science Board. (2012). Science and engineering indicators. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/ statistics/seind12/
22. Price, D.J. de Solla,. (1976). A general theory of bibliometric and other cumulative advantage processes. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 27 (5), 292-306.
23. Rabe-Hesketh, S., &, Skrondal, A., (2008). Multilevel and longitudinal modeling using Stata. College Station, TX: Stata Press.
24. Radicchi, F., &, Castellano, C., (2012a). Testing the fairness of citation indicators for comparison across scientific domains: The case of fractional citation counts. Journal of Informetrics, 6 (1), 121-130.
25. Radicchi, F., &, Castellano, C., (2012b). A reverse engineering approach to the suppression of citation biases reveals universal properties of citation distributions. PLoS ONE, 7 (3), e33833.
26. Radicchi, F., Fortunato, S., &, Castellano, C., (2008). Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105 (45), 17268-17272.
27. Rafols, I., Leydesdorff, L., O'Hare, A., Nightingale, P., &, Stirling, A., (2012). How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between innovation studies and business & management. Research Policy, 41 (7), 1262-1282.
28. Seglen, P.O., (1997). Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. British Medical Journal, 314, 498-502.
29. Small, H., &, Sweeney, E., (1985). Clustering the Science Citation Index using co-citations I. A comparison of methods. Scientometrics, 7 (3-6), 391-409.
30. Vanclay, J.K., (2012). Impact factor: Outdated artefact or stepping-stone to journal certification? Scientometrics, 92 (2), 211-238.
31. Waltman, L., Calero-Medina, C., Kosten, J., Noyons, E., Tijssen, R.J.W., van, Eck, N.J.,. Wouters, P., (2012). The Leiden Ranking 2011/2012: Data collection, indicators, and interpretation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63 (12), 2419-2432.
32. Waltman, L., &, Van Eck, N.J., (forthcoming). Source normalized indicators of citation impact: An overview of different approaches and an empirical comparison. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1208.6122
33. Waltman, L., van Eck, N.J., &, van Raan, A.F.J., (2012). Universality of citation distributions revisited. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63 (1), 72-77.
34. Zhou, P., &, Leydesdorff, L., (2011). Fractional counting of citations in research evaluation: A cross- and interdisciplinary assessment of the Tsinghua University in Beijing. Journal of Informetrics, 5 (3), 360-368.
35. Zitt, M., &, Small, H., (2008). Modifying the journal impact factor by fractional citation weighting: The audience factor. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59 (11), 1856-1860.