The case of scientometricians with the " absolute relative" impact indicator

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

26 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The effect of two different calculation methods for obtaining relative impact indicators is modelled. Science policy considerations make it clear that evaluating the sets of publications, the " ratio of the sums" method should be preferred over the " mean of the ratios" method. Accordingly, determining the relative total impact against the mean relative impact of the publications of teams or institutes may be preferred. The special problem caused by relating the number of citations of an individual article to the Garfield (Impact) Factor (or mean citedness) of the publishing journal (or a set of journals selected as standard) lower than zero is demonstrated by examples. The possible effects of the different share of publications in different fields on the value of the " new crown" index are also modelled. The assessment methods using several appropriately weighted indicators which result in a composite index are recommended. The acronym " BMV" is suggested to term the relative impact indicators (e.g. RCR, CPP/JCSm, CPP/FCSm and RW) in scientometrics.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)254-264
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Informetrics
Volume6
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2012

Fingerprint

Composite materials
Acronym
Impact Factor
Citations
science policy
Composite
Zero
Term
Values
Policy
Standards
Scientometrics
Impact factor
Science policy
Composite index
Calculation method

Keywords

  • " crown" indicator
  • Relative citation rate
  • Relative impact indicator
  • Relative subfield citedness

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Applied Mathematics
  • Modelling and Simulation
  • Statistics and Probability
  • Management Science and Operations Research
  • Computer Science Applications

Cite this

The case of scientometricians with the " absolute relative" impact indicator. / Vinkler, P.

In: Journal of Informetrics, Vol. 6, No. 2, 04.2012, p. 254-264.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{1b749870fe834ae4866714b240e16a42,
title = "The case of scientometricians with the {"} absolute relative{"} impact indicator",
abstract = "The effect of two different calculation methods for obtaining relative impact indicators is modelled. Science policy considerations make it clear that evaluating the sets of publications, the {"} ratio of the sums{"} method should be preferred over the {"} mean of the ratios{"} method. Accordingly, determining the relative total impact against the mean relative impact of the publications of teams or institutes may be preferred. The special problem caused by relating the number of citations of an individual article to the Garfield (Impact) Factor (or mean citedness) of the publishing journal (or a set of journals selected as standard) lower than zero is demonstrated by examples. The possible effects of the different share of publications in different fields on the value of the {"} new crown{"} index are also modelled. The assessment methods using several appropriately weighted indicators which result in a composite index are recommended. The acronym {"} BMV{"} is suggested to term the relative impact indicators (e.g. RCR, CPP/JCSm, CPP/FCSm and RW) in scientometrics.",
keywords = "{"} crown{"} indicator, Relative citation rate, Relative impact indicator, Relative subfield citedness",
author = "P. Vinkler",
year = "2012",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1016/j.joi.2011.12.004",
language = "English",
volume = "6",
pages = "254--264",
journal = "Journal of Informetrics",
issn = "1751-1577",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The case of scientometricians with the " absolute relative" impact indicator

AU - Vinkler, P.

PY - 2012/4

Y1 - 2012/4

N2 - The effect of two different calculation methods for obtaining relative impact indicators is modelled. Science policy considerations make it clear that evaluating the sets of publications, the " ratio of the sums" method should be preferred over the " mean of the ratios" method. Accordingly, determining the relative total impact against the mean relative impact of the publications of teams or institutes may be preferred. The special problem caused by relating the number of citations of an individual article to the Garfield (Impact) Factor (or mean citedness) of the publishing journal (or a set of journals selected as standard) lower than zero is demonstrated by examples. The possible effects of the different share of publications in different fields on the value of the " new crown" index are also modelled. The assessment methods using several appropriately weighted indicators which result in a composite index are recommended. The acronym " BMV" is suggested to term the relative impact indicators (e.g. RCR, CPP/JCSm, CPP/FCSm and RW) in scientometrics.

AB - The effect of two different calculation methods for obtaining relative impact indicators is modelled. Science policy considerations make it clear that evaluating the sets of publications, the " ratio of the sums" method should be preferred over the " mean of the ratios" method. Accordingly, determining the relative total impact against the mean relative impact of the publications of teams or institutes may be preferred. The special problem caused by relating the number of citations of an individual article to the Garfield (Impact) Factor (or mean citedness) of the publishing journal (or a set of journals selected as standard) lower than zero is demonstrated by examples. The possible effects of the different share of publications in different fields on the value of the " new crown" index are also modelled. The assessment methods using several appropriately weighted indicators which result in a composite index are recommended. The acronym " BMV" is suggested to term the relative impact indicators (e.g. RCR, CPP/JCSm, CPP/FCSm and RW) in scientometrics.

KW - " crown" indicator

KW - Relative citation rate

KW - Relative impact indicator

KW - Relative subfield citedness

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84857011272&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84857011272&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.joi.2011.12.004

DO - 10.1016/j.joi.2011.12.004

M3 - Article

VL - 6

SP - 254

EP - 264

JO - Journal of Informetrics

JF - Journal of Informetrics

SN - 1751-1577

IS - 2

ER -