An approach to the author citation potential: measures of scientific performance which are invariant across scientific fields
详细信息 查看全文
- 作者：Pablo Dorta-González ; María Isabel Dorta-González ; Rafael Suárez-Vega
- 关键词：Researcher assessment ; Author metric ; Bibliometric indicator ; Citation analysis ; Source normalization ; Citation potential
- 刊名：Scientometrics
- 出版年：2015
- 出版时间：February 2015
- 年：2015
- 卷：102
- 期：2
- 页码：1467-1496
- 全文大小：853 KB
- 参考文献：1. Dorta-González, P., & Dorta-González, M. I. (2011). Central indexes to the citation distribution: A complement to the h-index. / Scientometrics, / 88(3), 729-45. CrossRef
2. Dorta-González, P., & Dorta-González, M. I. (2013a). Comparing journals from different fields of science and social science through a JCR subject categories normalized impact factor. / Scientometrics, / 95(2), 645-72. CrossRef
3. Dorta-González, P., & Dorta-González, M. I. (2013b). Hábitos de publicación y citación según campos científicos: Principales diferencias a partir de las revistas JCR. / Revista Espa?ola de Documentación Científica, / 36(4), en012. CrossRef
4. Dorta-González, P., & Dorta-González, M. I. (2013c). Impact maturity times and citation time windows: The 2-year maximum journal impact factor. / Journal of Informetrics, / 7(3), 593-02. CrossRef
5. Dorta-González, P., Dorta-González, M. I., Santos-Pe?ate, D. R., & Suárez-Vega, R. (2014). Journal topic citation potential and between-field comparisons: The topic normalized impact factor. / Journal of Informetrics, / 8(2), 406-18. CrossRef
6. Egghe, L. (2013). Theoretical justification of the central area indices and the central interval indices. / Scientometrics, / 95(1), 25-4. CrossRef
7. Egghe, L., & Rousseau, R. (2002). A general framework for relative impact indicators. / Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science, / 27(1), 29-8.
8. García-Pérez, M. A. (2013). Limited validity of equations to predict the future h index. / Scientometrics, / 96(3), 901-09. CrossRef
9. Garfield, E. (1979). Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool? / Scientometrics, / 1(4), 359-75. CrossRef
10. Gl?nzel, W., Thijs, B., Schubert, A., & Debackere, K. (2009). Subfield-specific normalized relative indicators and a new generation of relational charts: Methodological foundations illustrated on the assessment of institutional research performance. / Scientometrics, / 78(1), 165-88. CrossRef
11. González-Pereira, B., Guerrero-Bote, V. P., & Moya-Anegón, F. (2009). The SJR indicator: A new indicator of journals-scientific prestige. / Journal of Informetrics, / 4(3), 379-91. CrossRef
12. Leydesdorff, L. (2006). 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, / 57(5), 601-13. CrossRef
13. Leydesdorff, L. (2012). Alternatives to the journal impact factor: I3 and the top-10?% (or top-25?%?) of the most-highly cited papers. / Scientometrics, / 92(2), 355-65. CrossRef
14. Leydesdorff, L., & Bornmann, L. (2011). 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, / 62(2), 217-29. CrossRef
15. Leydesdorff, L., & Rafols, I. (2011). Indicators of the interdisciplinarity of journals: Diversity, centrality, and citations. / Journal of Informetrics, / 5(1), 87-00. CrossRef
16. Lundberg, J. (2007). Lifting the crown-citation z-score. / Journal of Informetrics, / 1(2), 145-54.
文摘
The citation potential is a measure of the probability of being cited. Obviously, it is different among fields of science, social science, and humanities because of systematic differences in publication and citation behaviour across disciplines. In the past, the citation potential was studied at journal level considering the average number of references in established groups of journals (for example, the crown indicator is based on the journal subject categories in the Web of Science database). In this paper, some characterizations of the author’s scientific research through three different research dimensions are proposed: production (journal papers), impact (journal citations), and reference (bibliographical sources). Then, we propose different measures of the citation potential for authors based on a proportion of these dimensions. An empirical application, in a set of 120 randomly selected highly productive authors from the CSIC Research Centre (Spain) in four subject areas, shows that the ratio between production and impact dimensions is a normalized measure of the citation potential at the level of individual authors. Moreover, this ratio reduces the between-group variance in relation to the within-group variance in a higher proportion than the rest of the indicators analysed. Furthermore, it is consistent with the type of journal impact indicator used. A possible application of this result is in the selection and promotion process within interdisciplinary institutions, since it allows comparisons of authors based on their particular scientific research.