How to improve the prediction based on citation impact percentiles for years shortly after the publication date?

Journal of Informetrics

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 175-180

  Bornmann, Lutz ^a   Leydesdorff, Loet ^b   Wang, Jian ^c,d  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^c Institute for Research Information and Quality Assurance (iFQ)   (Germany)

^d UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Citation impact normalization; Percentile; Short citation window

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER APPLICATIONS;

CITATION IMPACT; JOURNAL PAPER; PERCENTILE; PREDICTION-BASED; REUTERS; THOMSON; WEB OF SCIENCE;

INFORMATION ANALYSIS;

EID: 84890169744     PISSN: 17511577     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2013.11.005     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Bornmann L. Scientific peer review. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 2011, 45:199-245.
2. Bornmann L. The problem of citation impact assessments for recent publication years in institutional evaluations. Journal of Informetrics 2013, 7(3):722-729. 10.1016/j.joi.2013.05.002.
3. Bornmann L., Daniel H.-D. What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior. Journal of Documentation 2008, 64(1):45-80. 10.1108/00220410810844150.
4. Bornmann L., de Moya Anegón F., Leydesdorff L. The new excellence indicator in the world report of the SCImago institutions rankings 2011. Journal of Informetrics 2012, 6(2):333-335. 10.1016/j.joi.2011.11.006.
5. Bornmann L., Leydesdorff L. The validation of (advanced) bibliometric indicators through peer assessments: A comparative study using data from InCites and F1000. Journal of Informetrics 2013, 7(2):286-291. 10.1016/j.joi.2012.12.003.
6. Bornmann L., Leydesdorff L., Mutz R. The use of percentiles and percentile rank classes in the analysis of bibliometric data: Opportunities and limits. Journal of Informetrics 2013, 7(1):158-165.
7. Bornmann L., Leydesdorff L., Wang J. Which percentile-based approach should be preferred for calculating normalized citation impact values? An empirical comparison of five approaches including a newly developed citation-rank approach (P100). Journal of Informetrics 2013, 8(4):933-944.
8. Bornmann L., Mutz R., Daniel H.-D. A multilevel-statistical reformulation of citation-based university rankings: The Leiden Ranking 2011/2012. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2013, 64(8):1649-1658.
9. Bornmann L., Williams R. How to calculate the practical significance of citation impact differences? An empirical example from evaluative institutional bibliometrics using adjusted predictions and marginal effects. Journal of Informetrics 2013, 7(2):562-574. 10.1016/j.joi.2013.02.005.
10. Cox N.J. Calculating percentile ranks or plotting positions 2005, Retrieved from http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/stat/pcrank.html.
11. Didegah F., Thelwall M. Determinants of research citation impact in nanoscience and nanotechnology. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2013, 64(5):1055-1064. 10.1002/asi.22806.
12. Goldstein H., Spiegelhalter D.J. League tables and their limitations: Statistical issues in comparisons of institutional performance. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A - Statistics in Society 1996, 159:385-409.
13. Guerrero-Bote V.P., de Moya-Anegon F. A further step forward in measuring journals' scientific prestige: The SJR2 indicator. Journal of Informetrics 2012, 6(4):674-688.
14. Hardin J., Hilbe J. Generalized linear models and extensions 2012, Stata Corporation, College Station, TX, USA. 3rd ed.
15. Harnad S. Validating research performance metrics against peer rankings. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics 2008, 8:103-107.
16. Hazen A. Storage to be provided in impounding reservoirs for municipal water supply. Transactions of American Society of Civil Engineers 1914, 77:1539-1640.
17. Hyndman R.J., Fan Y.N. Sample quantiles in statistical packages. American Statistician 1996, 50(4):361-365.
18. Kline R.B. Beyond significance testing: Reforming data analysis methods in behavioral research 2004, American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, USA.
19. Kohler U., Kreuter F. Data analysis using Stata 2012, Stata Press, Stata Corporation, College Station, TX, USA. 3rd ed.
20. Long J.S., Freese J. Regression models for categorical dependent variables using Stata 2006, Stata Press, Stata Corporation, College Station, TX, USA. 2nd ed.
21. StataCorp. Stata statistical software: Release 13 2013, Stata Corporation, College Station, TX, USA.
22. Taborsky M. Biased citation practice and taxonomic parochialism. Ethology 2009, 115(2):105-111. 10.1111/j. 1439-0310.2009.01610.x.
23. Vieira E.S., Gomes J.A.N.F. Citations to scientific articles: Its distribution and dependence on the article features. Journal of Informetrics 2010, 4(1):1-13. 10.1016/j.joi.2009.06.002.
24. Waltman L., Calero-Medina C., Kosten J., Noyons E.C.M., Tijssen R.J.W., van Eck N.J., et al. The Leiden Ranking 2011/2012: Data collection, indicators, and interpretation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2012, 63(12):2419-2432.
25. Wang J. Citation time window choice for research impact evaluation. Scientometrics 2013, 94(3):851-872. 10.1007/s11192-012-0775-9.