Relative Citation Ratio (RCR): An empirical attempt to study a new field-normalized bibliometric indicator

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 68, Issue 4, 2017, Pages 1064-1067

  Bornmann, Lutz ^a   Haunschild, Robin ^b  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE   (Germany)

^b MAX PLANCK INSTITUT FÜR FESTKÖRPERFORSCHUNG   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANDERSONS; BIBLIOMETRIC INDICATORS; IMPACT INDICATORS; NOCV1; PEER ASSESSMENT;

PUBLICATION;

EID: 84994381451     PISSN: 23301635     EISSN: 23301643     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.23729     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Bloudoff-Indelicato, M. (2015). NIH metric that assesses article impact stirs debate. The US biomedical funding agency is using the metric to evaluate funded research. Retrieved from http://www.nature.com/news/nih-metric-that-assesses-article-impact-stirs-debate-1.18734
2. Bornmann, L. (2014). Validity of altmetrics data for measuring societal impact: A study using data from Altmetric and F1000Prime. Journal of Informetrics, 8(4), 935–950.
3. Bornmann, L. (2015a). Inter-rater reliability and convergent validity of F1000Prime peer review. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(12), 2415–2426.
4. Bornmann, L. (2015b). Usefulness of altmetrics for measuring the broader impact of research: A case study using data from PLOS and F1000Prime. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 67(3), 305–319. doi: 10.1108/AJIM-09-2014-0115.
5. Bornmann, L., de Moya Anegón, F., & Mutz, R. (2013). Do universities or research institutions with a specific subject profile have an advantage or a disadvantage in institutional rankings? A latent class analysis with data from the SCImago ranking. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(11), 2310–2316.
6. Bornmann, L., & Haunschild, R. (2015). Which people use which scientific papers? An evaluation of data from F1000 and Mendeley. Journal of Informetrics, 9(3), 477–487.
7. Bornmann, L., Leydesdorff, L., & Mutz, R. (2013). The use of percentiles and percentile rank classes in the analysis of bibliometric data: Opportunities and limits. Journal of Informetrics, 7(1), 158–165.
8. Bornmann, L., & Marx, W. (2014). The wisdom of citing scientists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 65(6), 1288–1292.
9. Bornmann, L., & Marx, W. (2015). Methods for the generation of normalized citation impact scores in bibliometrics: Which method best reflects the judgements of experts? Journal of Informetrics, 9(2), 408–418.
10. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
11. Glänzel, W. (2008). Seven myths in bibliometrics. About facts and fiction in quantitative science studies. Paper presented at the Proceedings of WIS 2008, Berlin. Fourth International Conference on Webometrics, Informetrics and Scientometrics & Ninth COLLNET Meeting, Berlin, Germany.
12. Hazen, A. (1914). Storage to be provided in impounding reservoirs for municipal water supply. Transactions of American Society of Civil Engineers, 77, 1539–1640.
13. Hutchins, B.I., Yuan, X., Anderson, J.M., & Santangelo, G.M. (2015). Relative Citation Ratio (RCR): A new metric that uses citation rates to measure influence at the article level. Retrieved from http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/10/22/029629
14. Ruiz-Castillo, J., & Waltman, L. (2015). Field-normalized citation impact indicators using algorithmically constructed classification systems of science. Journal of Informetrics, 9(1), 102–117. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2014.11.010.
15. Vinkler, P. (2010). The evaluation of research by scientometric indicators. Oxford, UK: Chandos Publishing.
16. Waltman, L. (2015). NIH's new citation metric: A step forward in quantifying scientific impact? Retrieved from http://www.cwts.nl/blog?article=n-q2u294&title=nihs-new-citation-metric-a-step-forward-in-quantifying-scientific-impact#sthash.w1KC3A1O.dpuf
17. Waltman, L., van Eck, N., van Leeuwen, T., Visser, M., & van Raan, A. (2011a). Towards a new crown indicator: An empirical analysis. Scientometrics, 87(3), 467–481. doi: 10.1007/s11192-011-0354-5.
18. Waltman, L., & van Eck, N.J. (2013). A systematic empirical comparison of different approaches for normalizing citation impact indicators. Journal of Informetrics, 7(4), 833–849.
19. Waltman, L., van Eck, N.J., van Leeuwen, T.N., Visser, M.S., & van Raan, A.F.J. (2011b). Towards a new crown indicator: Some theoretical considerations. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 37–47. doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2010.08.001.