Citation time window choice for research impact evaluation
TL;DR: There are significant differences in citation ageing between different research fields, document types, total citation counts, and publication months, and within group differences are more striking; many papers in the slowest ageing field may still age faster than many books in the fastest ageing field.
Abstract: This paper aims to inform choice of citation time window for research evaluation, by answering three questions: (1) How accurate is it to use citation counts in short time windows to approximate total citations? (2) How does citation ageing vary by research fields, document types, publication months, and total citations? (3) Can field normalization improve the accuracy of using short citation time windows? We investigate the 31-year life time non-self-citation processes of all Thomson Reuters Web of Science journal papers published in 1980. The correlation between non-self-citation counts in each time window and total non-self-citations in all 31 years is calculated, and it is lower for more highly cited papers than less highly cited ones. There are significant differences in citation ageing between different research fields, document types, total citation counts, and publication months. However, the within group differences are more striking; many papers in the slowest ageing field may still age faster than many papers in the fastest ageing field. Furthermore, field normalization cannot improve the accuracy of using short citation time windows. Implications and recommendations for choosing adequate citation time windows are discussed.
Citations
More filters
01 Jan 1995
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors propose a method to improve the quality of the data collected by the data collection system. But it is difficult to implement and time consuming and computationally expensive.
Abstract: 本文对国际科学计量学杂志《Ｓｃｉｅｎｔｏｍｅｔｒｉｃｓ》１９７９－１９９１年的研究论文内容、栏目、作者及国别和编委及国别作了计量分析，揭示出科学计量学研究的重点、活动的中心及发展趋势，说明了学科带头人在发展科学计量学这门新兴学科中的作用。
1,636 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, an in-depth review of the literature on citation impact indicators is provided, focusing on the selection of publications and citations to be included in the calculation of citation impact indicator.
774 citations
Posted Content•
TL;DR: An in-depth review of the literature on citation impact indicators with recommendations for future research on normalization for field differences and counting methods for dealing with co-authored publications.
Abstract: Citation impact indicators nowadays play an important role in research evaluation, and consequently these indicators have received a lot of attention in the bibliometric and scientometric literature. This paper provides an in-depth review of the literature on citation impact indicators. First, an overview is given of the literature on bibliographic databases that can be used to calculate citation impact indicators (Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar). Next, selected topics in the literature on citation impact indicators are reviewed in detail. The first topic is the selection of publications and citations to be included in the calculation of citation impact indicators. The second topic is the normalization of citation impact indicators, in particular normalization for field differences. Counting methods for dealing with co-authored publications are the third topic, and citation impact indicators for journals are the last topic. The paper concludes by offering some recommendations for future research.
469 citations
Cites background from "Citation time window choice for res..."
...According to Wang (2013), there is no generally applicable rule for choosing...
[...]
...Wildgaard et al. (2014) present a review of the literature on bibliometric indicators for assessing the performance of individual researchers....
[...]
...The concept of citing-side normalization originates from Zitt and Small (2008). Different approaches to citing-side normalization are discussed by Zitt and Small (2008), Zitt (2010), Gómez-Sancho and Mancebón-Torrubia (2009), Moed (2010a), Leydesdorff and Opthof (2010), Leydesdorff and Bornmann (2011a),...
[...]
TL;DR: Altmetrics as discussed by the authors is a term to describe web-based metrics for the impact of publications and other scholarly material by using data from social media platforms (e.g. Twitter or Mendeley).
363 citations
TL;DR: In this article, a bibliometric study was conducted to explore the state of off-site construction research, and a quantitative approach using "science mapping" techniques was employed to examine 501 top-ranked construction journal articles.
351 citations
References
More filters
01 Jan 1995
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors propose a method to improve the quality of the data collected by the data collection system. But it is difficult to implement and time consuming and computationally expensive.
Abstract: 本文对国际科学计量学杂志《Ｓｃｉｅｎｔｏｍｅｔｒｉｃｓ》１９７９－１９９１年的研究论文内容、栏目、作者及国别和编委及国别作了计量分析，揭示出科学计量学研究的重点、活动的中心及发展趋势，说明了学科带头人在发展科学计量学这门新兴学科中的作用。
1,636 citations
TL;DR: What different countries get for their research spending is illustrated in the chart below, which shows how research spending in these countries has changed over the past 50 years.
Abstract: To measure the quantity and quality od science in different nations, the author has analysed the numbers of research papers and reviews, and their citations. All data are were provided by Thomson ISI, previously known as the Institute for Scientific Information.
1,113 citations
"Citation time window choice for res..." refers methods in this paper
...Although the validity of such indicators is still in dispute (De Bellis 2009), citation counts have been increasingly used in real-world research evaluations and funding allocations (Abbott 2009; King 2004)....
[...]
TL;DR: It is shown that the probability that an article is cited c times has large variations between different disciplines, but all distributions are rescaled on a universal curve when the relative indicator cf = c/c0 is considered, where c0 is the average number of citations per article for the discipline.
Abstract: We study the distributions of citations received by a single publication within several disciplines, spanning broad areas of science. We show that the probability that an article is cited c times has large variations between different disciplines, but all distributions are rescaled on a universal curve when the relative indicator cf = c/c0 is considered, where c0 is the average number of citations per article for the discipline. In addition we show that the same universal behavior occurs when citation distributions of articles published in the same field, but in different years, are compared. These findings provide a strong validation of cf as an unbiased indicator for citation performance across disciplines and years. Based on this indicator, we introduce a generalization of the h index suitable for comparing scientists working in different fields.
807 citations
"Citation time window choice for res..." refers background in this paper
...Many field normalization approaches have been developed to make citations more compatible across research fields (Leydesdorff and Opthof 2010; Radicchi et al. 2008; Schubert and Braun 1996)....
[...]
TL;DR: The first extensive measurement of the occurrence of Sleeping Beauties in the science literature is reported, derived from the measurements an ‘awakening’ probability function and identified the ‘most extreme Sleeping Beauty so far’.
Abstract: A 'Sleeping Beauty in Science' is a publication that goes unnoticed ('sleeps') for a long time and then, almost suddenly, attracts a lot of attention ('is awakened by a prince'). We here report the -to our knowledge- first extensive measurement of the occurrence of Sleeping Beauties in the science literature. We derived from the measurements an 'awakening' probability function and identified the 'most extreme Sleeping Beauty so far'.
466 citations
"Citation time window choice for res..." refers background in this paper
...“Sleeping beauties” are very rare and therefore may not cause serious problems in research evaluation using short citation time windows (Glänzel et al. 2003; Van Raan 2004)....
[...]
...Therefore, a short time window would discriminate against “delayed rise - slow decline” papers, which often turn out to be more valuable and influential and are also known as “scientific prematurity” (Stent 1972), “delayed recognition” (Garfield 1980), and “sleeping beauties” (Van Raan 2004)....
[...]
Book•
09 Mar 2009
TL;DR: On the shoulders of dwarfs : citation as rhetorical device and the criticisms to the normative model and measuring scientific communication in the twentieth century : from bibliometrics to cybermetrics.
Abstract: Biblio/sciento/infor-metrics : terminological issues and early historical developments -- The empirical foundations of bibliometrics : the Science citation index -- The philosophical foundations of bibliometrics : Bernal, Merton, Price, Garfield, and Small -- The mathematical foundations of bibliometrics -- Maps and paradigms : bibliographic citations at the service of the history and sociology of science -- Impact factor and the evaluation of scientists : bibliographic citations at the service of science policy and management -- On the shoulders of dwarfs : citation as rhetorical device and the criticisms to the normative model -- Measuring scientific communication in the twentieth century : from bibliometrics to cybermetrics.
434 citations