The normalization of citation counts based on classification systems
نویسندگان
چکیده
If we want to assess whether the paper in question has had a particularly high or low citation impact compared to other papers, the standard practice in bibliometrics is to normalize citations in respect of the subject category and publication year. A number of proposals for an improved procedure in the normalization of citation impact have been put forward in recent years. Against the background of these proposals this study describes an ideal solution for the normalization of citation impact: in a first step, the reference set for the publication in question is collated by means of a classification scheme, where every publication is associated with a single principal research field or subfield entry (e. g. via Chemical Abstracts sections) and a publication year. In a second step, percentiles of citation counts are calculated for this set and used to assign the normalized citation impact score to the publications (and also to the publication in question).
منابع مشابه
Quantitative evaluation of alternative field normalization procedures
Wide differences in publication and citation practices makes impossible the direct comparison of raw citation counts across scientific disciplines. Recent research has studied new and traditional normalization procedures aimed at suppressing as much as possible these disproportions in citation numbers among scientific domains. Using the recently introduced IDCP (Inequality due to Differences in...
متن کاملA systematic empirical comparison of different approaches for normalizing citation impact indicators
We address the question how citation-based bibliometric indicators can best be normalized to ensure fair comparisons between publications from different scientific fields and different years. In a systematic large-scale empirical analysis, we compare a traditional normalization approach based on a field classification system with three source normalization approaches. We pay special attention t...
متن کاملThe effect on citation inequality of differences in citation practices at the web of science subject category level
This paper studies the impact of differences in citation practices at the sub-field, or Web of Science subject category level using the model introduced in Crespo et al. (2012) according to which the number of citations received by an article depends on its underlying scientific influence and the field to which it belongs. We use the same Thomson Reuters dataset of about 4.4 million articles pu...
متن کاملThe comparison of normalization procedures based on different classification systems
In this paper, we develop a novel methodology within the IDCP measuring framework for comparing normalization procedures based on different classification systems of articles into scientific disciplines. Firstly, we discuss the properties of two rankings, based on a graphical and a numerical approach, for the comparison of any pair of normalization procedures using a single classification syste...
متن کاملHow fractional counting affects the Impact Factor: Normalization in terms of differences in citation potentials among fields of science
The ISI-Impact Factors suffer from a number of drawbacks, among them the statistics— why should one use the mean and not the median?—and the incomparability among fields of science because of systematic differences in citation behavior among fields. Can these drawbacks be counteracted by counting citation weights fractionally instead of using whole numbers in the numerators? (i) Fractional cita...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
- Publications
 
دوره 1 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2013