Normalization, CWTS indicators, and the Leiden Rankings: Differences in citation behavior at the level of fields
نویسندگان
چکیده
Van Raan et al. (2010; arXiv:1003.2113) have proposed a new indicator (MNCS) for field normalization. Since field normalization is also used in the Leiden Rankings of universities, we elaborate our critique of journal normalization in Opthof & Leydesdorff (2010; arXiv:1002.2769) in this rejoinder concerning field normalization. Fractional citation counting thoroughly solves the issue of normalization for differences in citation behavior among fields. This indicator can also be used to obtain a normalized
منابع مشابه
An Alternative to Field-Normalization in the Aggregation of Heterogeneous Scientific Fields
A possible solution to the problem of aggregating heterogeneous fields in the all-sciences case relies on the normalization of the raw citations received by all publications. In this paper, we study an alternative solution that does not require any citation normalization. Provided one uses sizeand scale-independent indicators, the citation impact of any research unit can be calculated as the av...
متن کاملNormalization at the field level: Fractional counting of citations
Van Raan et al. (2010) accepted our critique for the case of journal normalization (previously CPP/JCSm); CWTS has in the meantime adapted its procedures. However, a new indicator was proposed for field normalization (previously CPP/FCSm), called the “mean normalized citation score” (MNCS; cf. Lundberg, 2007). In our opinion, this latter change does not sufficiently resolve the problems. Since ...
متن کاملCWTS crown indicator measures citation impact of a research group's publication oeuvre
The article “Caveats for the journal and field normalizations in the CWTS (“Leiden”) evaluations of research performance”, published by Tobias Opthof and Loet Leydesdorff (Opthof & Leydesdorff, 2010), denoted as O&L below, deals with a subject as important as the application of so called field normalized indicators of citation impact in the assessment of research performance of individual resea...
متن کاملField-normalized citation impact indicators using algorithmically constructed classification systems of science
We study the problem of normalizing citation impact indicators for differences in citation practices across scientific fields. Normalization of citation impact indicators is usually done based on a field classification system. In practice, the Web of Science journal subject categories are often used for this purpose. However, many of these subject categories have a quite broad scope and are not...
متن کاملUniversity Citation Distributions
In this paper we investigate the characteristics of the citation distributions of the 500 universities in the 2013 edition of the CWTS Leiden Ranking. We use a WoS dataset consisting of 3.6 million articles published in 2003-2008 with a five-year citation window, and classified into 5,119 clusters. The main findings are the following four. Firstly, The universality claim, according to which all...
متن کامل