Reference standards for citation based assessments

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

41 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

One of the most crucial points of citation-based assessments is to find proper reference standards to which the otherwise meaningless plain citation counts can be compared. Using such standards, mere absolute numbers can be turned into relative indicators, suitable for cross-national and cross-field comparisons. In the present study, three possible choice of reference standards for citation assessments are discussed. Citation rates of publications under study can be compared to the average citation rates of the papers of the publishing journals to result in Relative Citation Rate (RCR), an indicator successfully used in several comparative scientometric analyses (see, e.g. Refs 1-5). A more "customized" reference set is defined by the related records in the new CD Edition of the Science Citation Index database. Using the socalled "bibliographic coupling" technique, a set of papers with a high measure of similarity in their list of references is assigned to every single paper of the database. Beside of being an excellent retrieval tool, related records provide a suitable reference set to assess the relative standing of a given set of papers as measured by citation indicators. The third choice introduced in this study is specifically designed for assessing journals. For this purpose, the set of journals cited by the journal in question seems to be a useful basis to compare with. The pros and cons of the three choices are discussed and several examples are given.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)21-35
Number of pages15
JournalScientometrics
Volume26
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 1993

Fingerprint

CD
edition
science

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Library and Information Sciences
  • Computer Science Applications
  • Computational Theory and Mathematics
  • Social Sciences(all)
  • Law

Cite this

Reference standards for citation based assessments. / Schubert, A.; Braun, T.

In: Scientometrics, Vol. 26, No. 1, 01.1993, p. 21-35.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{72dbe096e6554648b55d6fbe6fa91fc0,
title = "Reference standards for citation based assessments",
abstract = "One of the most crucial points of citation-based assessments is to find proper reference standards to which the otherwise meaningless plain citation counts can be compared. Using such standards, mere absolute numbers can be turned into relative indicators, suitable for cross-national and cross-field comparisons. In the present study, three possible choice of reference standards for citation assessments are discussed. Citation rates of publications under study can be compared to the average citation rates of the papers of the publishing journals to result in Relative Citation Rate (RCR), an indicator successfully used in several comparative scientometric analyses (see, e.g. Refs 1-5). A more {"}customized{"} reference set is defined by the related records in the new CD Edition of the Science Citation Index database. Using the socalled {"}bibliographic coupling{"} technique, a set of papers with a high measure of similarity in their list of references is assigned to every single paper of the database. Beside of being an excellent retrieval tool, related records provide a suitable reference set to assess the relative standing of a given set of papers as measured by citation indicators. The third choice introduced in this study is specifically designed for assessing journals. For this purpose, the set of journals cited by the journal in question seems to be a useful basis to compare with. The pros and cons of the three choices are discussed and several examples are given.",
author = "A. Schubert and T. Braun",
year = "1993",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1007/BF02016790",
language = "English",
volume = "26",
pages = "21--35",
journal = "Scientometrics",
issn = "0138-9130",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reference standards for citation based assessments

AU - Schubert, A.

AU - Braun, T.

PY - 1993/1

Y1 - 1993/1

N2 - One of the most crucial points of citation-based assessments is to find proper reference standards to which the otherwise meaningless plain citation counts can be compared. Using such standards, mere absolute numbers can be turned into relative indicators, suitable for cross-national and cross-field comparisons. In the present study, three possible choice of reference standards for citation assessments are discussed. Citation rates of publications under study can be compared to the average citation rates of the papers of the publishing journals to result in Relative Citation Rate (RCR), an indicator successfully used in several comparative scientometric analyses (see, e.g. Refs 1-5). A more "customized" reference set is defined by the related records in the new CD Edition of the Science Citation Index database. Using the socalled "bibliographic coupling" technique, a set of papers with a high measure of similarity in their list of references is assigned to every single paper of the database. Beside of being an excellent retrieval tool, related records provide a suitable reference set to assess the relative standing of a given set of papers as measured by citation indicators. The third choice introduced in this study is specifically designed for assessing journals. For this purpose, the set of journals cited by the journal in question seems to be a useful basis to compare with. The pros and cons of the three choices are discussed and several examples are given.

AB - One of the most crucial points of citation-based assessments is to find proper reference standards to which the otherwise meaningless plain citation counts can be compared. Using such standards, mere absolute numbers can be turned into relative indicators, suitable for cross-national and cross-field comparisons. In the present study, three possible choice of reference standards for citation assessments are discussed. Citation rates of publications under study can be compared to the average citation rates of the papers of the publishing journals to result in Relative Citation Rate (RCR), an indicator successfully used in several comparative scientometric analyses (see, e.g. Refs 1-5). A more "customized" reference set is defined by the related records in the new CD Edition of the Science Citation Index database. Using the socalled "bibliographic coupling" technique, a set of papers with a high measure of similarity in their list of references is assigned to every single paper of the database. Beside of being an excellent retrieval tool, related records provide a suitable reference set to assess the relative standing of a given set of papers as measured by citation indicators. The third choice introduced in this study is specifically designed for assessing journals. For this purpose, the set of journals cited by the journal in question seems to be a useful basis to compare with. The pros and cons of the three choices are discussed and several examples are given.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0009158026&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0009158026&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/BF02016790

DO - 10.1007/BF02016790

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0009158026

VL - 26

SP - 21

EP - 35

JO - Scientometrics

JF - Scientometrics

SN - 0138-9130

IS - 1

ER -