Journal topic citation potential and between-field comparisons: The topic normalized impact factor

Journal of Informetrics

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 406-418

  Dorta González, Pablo ^a   Dorta González, María Isabel ^b   Santos Peñate, Dolores Rosa ^a   Suárez Vega, Rafael ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LAS PALMAS DE GRAN CANARIA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSIDAD DE LA LAGUNA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Bibliometric indicator; Citation analysis; Citation potential; Journal assessment; Journal impact factor; Journal metric; Source normalization

Indexed keywords

BIBLIOMETRIC INDICATORS; CITATION ANALYSIS; CITATION POTENTIAL; IMPACT FACTOR; JOURNAL ASSESSMENT; JOURNAL METRIC; SOURCE NORMALIZATION;

COMPUTER APPLICATIONS;

EID: 84894855553     PISSN: 17511577     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2014.01.013     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Althouse B.M., West J.D., Bergstrom C.T., Bergstrom T. Differences in impact factor across fields and over time. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2009, 60(1):27-34.
2. Bensman S.J. Garfield and the impact factor. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 2007, 41(1):93-155.
3. Bergstrom C. Eigenfactor: Measuring the value and prestige of scholarly journals. College and Research Libraries News 2007, 68(5):314.
4. Bornmann L., Mutz R. The advantage of the use of samples in evaluative bibliometric studies. Journal of Informetrics 2013, 7(1):89-90.
5. 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.
6. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences 1988, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Hillsdale, NJ, USA. 2nd ed.
7. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis. Current Directions in Psychological Science 1992, 1(3):98-101.
8. Dorta-González P., Dorta-González M.I. Indicador bibliométrico basado en el índice h. Revista Española de Documentación Científica 2010, 33(2):225-245.
9. Dorta-González P., Dorta-González M.I. Central indexes to the citation distribution: A complement to the h-index. Scientometrics 2011, 88(3):729-745.
10. Dorta-González P., Dorta-González M.I. Comparing journals from different fields of science and social science through a JCR subject categories normalized impact factor. Scientometrics 2013, 95(2):645-672.
11. Dorta-González P., Dorta-González M.I. Impact maturity times and citation time windows: The 2-year maximum journal impact factor. Journal of Informetrics 2013, 7(3):593-602.
12. Egghe L. Theoretical justification of the central area indices and the central interval indices. Scientometrics 2013, 95(1):25-34.
13. Egghe L., Rousseau R. A general framework for relative impact indicators. Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science 2002, 27(1):29-48.
14. Garfield E. Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation. Science 1972, 178(4060):471-479.
15. Garfield E. Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool?. Scientometrics 1979, 1(4):359-375.
16. González-Pereira B., Guerrero-Bote V.P., Moya-Anegón F. The SJR indicator: A new indicator of journals' scientific prestige. Journal of Informetrics 2009, 4(3):379-391.
17. 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(5):601-613.
18. Leydesdorff L. How are new citation-based journal indicators adding to the bibliometric toolbox?. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2009, 60(7):1327-1336.
19. Leydesdorff L. Alternatives to the journal impact factor: I3 and the top-10% (or top-25%?) of the most-highly cited papers. Scientometrics 2012, 92(2):355-365.
20. Leydesdorff L., Bornmann L. How fractional counting of citations 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 2011, 62(2):217-229.
21. Leydesdorff L., Rafols I. Indicators of the interdisciplinarity of journals: Diversity, centrality, and citations. Journal of Informetrics 2011, 5(1):87-100.
22. Moed H.F. Measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals. Journal of Informetrics 2010, 4(3):265-277.
23. Moed H.F., Colledge L., Reedijk J., Moya-Anegón F., Guerrero-Bote V., Plume A., et al. Citation-based metrics are appropriate tools in journal assessment provided that they are accurate and used in an informed way. Scientometrics 2012, 92(2):367-376.
24. Pudovkin A.I., Garfield E. Algorithmic procedure for finding semantically related journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2002, 53(13):1113-1119.
25. Rafols I., Leydesdorff L. Content-based and algorithmic classifications of journals: Perspectives on the dynamics of scientific communication and indexer effects. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2009, 60(9):1823-1835.
26. Rosvall M., Bergstrom C.T. Maps of random walks on complex networks reveal community structure. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2008, 105(4):1118-1123.
27. Rousseau R. What does the web of science five-year synchronous impact factor have to offer?. Chinese Journal of Library and Information Science 2009, 2(3):1-7.
28. 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(3):431-435.
29. Wagner C., Roessner J.D., Bobb K., Klein J., Boyack K., Keyton J., et al. Approaches to understanding and measuring interdisciplinary scientific research (IDR): A review of the literature. Journal of Informetrics 2011, 5(1):14-26.
30. 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.
31. 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(11):1856-1860.