Ranking authors using fractional counting of citations: An axiomatic approach
نویسندگان
چکیده
This paper analyzes from an axiomatic point of view a recent proposal for counting citations: the value of a citation given by a paper is inversely proportional to the total number of papers it cites. This way of fractionally counting citations was suggested as a possible way to normalize citation counts between fields of research having different citation cultures. It belongs to the “citing-side” approach to normalization. We focus on the properties characterizing this way of counting citations when it comes to ranking authors. Our analysis is conducted within a formal framework that is more complex but also more realistic than the one usually adopted in most axiomatic analyses of this kind.
منابع مشابه
Bibliometric rankings of journals based on Impact Factors: An axiomatic approach
This paper proposes an axiomatic analysis of Impact Factors when used as tools for ranking scientific journals. This work draws on the similarities between the problem of comparing distribution of citations among papers and that of comparing probability distributions on consequences as commonly done in decision theory. Our analysis singles out a number of characteristic properties of the rankin...
متن کاملCounting Methods & University Ranking by H-Index
This paper describes the results from using four counting methods that represented three different counting approaches – i.e., whole counting, straight counting, and fractional counting, on university rankings based on Hindex. Using a large bibliometric dataset that contained 20 years of physics research papers and citations from Web of Science, we tested the methods on the data and sorted 299 ...
متن کاملHow to evaluate universities in terms of their relative citation impacts: Fractional counting of citations and the normalization of differences among disciplines
Fractional counting of citations can improve on ranking of multi-disciplinary research units (such as universities) by normalizing the differences among fields of science in terms of differences in citation behavior. Furthermore, normalization in terms of citing papers abolishes the unsolved questions in scientometrics about the delineation of fields of science in terms of journals and normaliz...
متن کاملAxiomatic Quantification of Co-authors' Relative Contributions
Over the past decades, the competition for academic resources has gradually intensified, and worsened with the current financial crisis. To optimize the resource allocation, individualized assessment of research results is being actively studied but the current indices, such as the number of papers, the number of citations, the hfactor and its variants have limitations, especially their inabili...
متن کاملConstructing bibliometric networks: A comparison between full and fractional counting
The analysis of bibliometric networks, such as co-authorship, bibliographic coupling, and co-citation networks, has received a considerable amount of attention. Much less attention has been paid to the construction of these networks. We point out that different approaches can be taken to construct a bibliometric network. Normally the full counting approach is used, but we propose an alternative...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید
ثبت ناماگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید
ورودعنوان ژورنال:
- J. Informetrics
دوره 10 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2016