The comparison of normalization procedures based on different classification systems

Journal of Informetrics

Volumn 7, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 945-958

  Li, Yunrong ^a   Ruiz Castillo, Javier ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD CARLOS III DE MADRID   (Spain)

Author keywords

Citation inequality; Citation practices; Classification systems; Normalization procedures

Indexed keywords

LARGE DATASET;

AGGREGATE CLASSIFICATION; CITATION INEQUALITY; CITATION PRACTICES; CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM; NORMALIZATION FACTORS; NORMALIZATION PROCEDURES; NUMERICAL APPROACHES; SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINE;

CLASSIFICATION (OF INFORMATION);

EID: 84886631965     PISSN: 17511577     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2013.09.005     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. 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.
2. Bornmann L., Marx W. How good is research really?. EMBO Reports 2013, 14:226-230.
3. Boyack K., Klavans R., Börner K. Mapping the backbone of Science. Scientometrics 2005, 64:351-374.
4. Braun T., Glänzel W., Schubert A. Scientometrics indicators. A 32 country comparison of publication productivity and citation impact 1985, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd, Singapore, Philadelphia.
5. Crespo J.A., Li Y., Ruiz-Castillo J. The measurement of the effect on citation inequality of differences in citation practices across scientific fields. PLoS ONE 2013, 8(3):e58727.
6. Crespo, J. A., Herranz, N., Li, Y., Ruiz-Castillo, J. (2013). The effect on citation inequality of differences in citation practices at the web of science subject category level, Working Paper 13-03, Universidad Carlos III, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (forthcoming). http://hdl.handle.net/10016/16327.
7. 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.
8. Glänzel W., Schubert A. A new classification scheme of science fields and subfields designed for scientometric evaluation purposes. Scientometrics 2003, 56:357-367.
9. Leydesdorff L. Top-down decomposition of the journal citation report of the social science citation index: Graph- and factor analytical approaches. Scientometrics 2004, 60:159-180.
10. Leydesdorff L. Can scientific journals be classified in terms of aggregated journal-journal citation relations using the journal citation reports?. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2006, 57:601-613.
11. Leydesdorff L., Opthof T. Normalization at the field level: Fractional counting of citations. Journal of Informetrics 2010, 4:644-646.
12. Leydesdorff L., Rafols I. A global map of science based on the ISI categories. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2009, 60:348-362.
13. Li Y., Castellano C., Radicchi F., Ruiz-Castillo J. Quantitative evaluation of alternative field normalization procedures. Journal of Informetrics 2013, 7:746-755.
14. Moed H.F. Measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals. Journal of Informetrics 2010, 4:265-277.
15. Moed H.F., Burger W.J., Frankfort J.G., van Raan A.F.J. The use of bibliometric data for the measurement of university research performance. Research Policy 1985, 14:131-149.
16. 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, 33:381-422.
17. Moed H.F., van Raan A.F.J. Indicators of research performance. Handbook of quantitative studies of science and technology, North Holland 1988, 177-192. A.F.J. van Raan (Ed.).
18. Radicchi F., Fortunato S., Castellano C. Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2008, 105:17268-17272.
19. Radicchi F., Castellano C. A reverse engineering approach to the suppression of citation biases reveals universal properties of citation distributions. PLoS ONE 2012, 7:e33833. 1-7.
20. Schubert A., Braun T. Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact. Scientometrics 1986, 9:281-291.
21. Schubert A., Braun T. Cross-field normalization of scientometric indicators. Scientometrics 1996, 36:311-324.
22. Schubert A., Glänzel W., Braun T. Relative citation rate: A new indicator for measuring the impact of publications. Proceedings of the first national conference with international participation in scientometrics and linguistics of scientific text 1983, D. Tomov, L. Dimitrova (Eds.).
23. Schubert A., Glänzel W., Braun T. A new methodology for ranking scientific institutions. Scientometrics 1987, 12:267-292.
24. 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, 137-176. A.F.J. van Raan (Ed.).
25. Sirtes D. Finding the easter eggs hidden by oneself: Why Radicchi and Castellano's (2012) fairness test for citation indicators is not fair. Journal of Informetrics 2012, 6:448-450.
26. Small H. Visualizing science by citation mapping. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 1999, 50:799-813.
27. Tijssen J.W., van Leeuwen T. Bibliometric analysis of world science. Extended technical annex to chapter 5 of the Third European Report on Science and Technology Indicators, Directorate-General for Research 2003, Office for Official Publications of the European Community, Luxembourg.
28. Vinkler P. Evaluation of some methods for the relative assessment of scientific publications. Scientometrics 1986, 10:157-177.
29. Vinkler P. Relations of relative scientometric indicators. Scientometrics 2003, 58:687-694.
30. Waltman L., Van Eck N.J. A new methodology for constructing a publication-level classification system of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2012, 63:2378-2392.
31. Waltman L., Van Eck N.J. Source normalized indicators of citation impact: An overview of different approaches and an empirical comparison. Scientometrics 2013, 96(3):699-716. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0913-4.
32. Waltman L., Van Eck N.J. A systematic empirical comparison of different approaches for normalizing citation impact indicators. Journal of Informetrics 2013, 7(4):833-849. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.08.002.
33. Zitt M., Ramana-Rahari S., Bassecoulard E. Relativity of citation performance and excellence measures: From cross-field to cross-scale effects of field-normalization. Scientometrics 2005, 63:373-401.
34. 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 2008, 59:1856-1860.