-
Leydesdorff, L.; Bornmann, L.: How fractional counting of citations affects the impact factor : normalization in terms of differences in citation potentials among fields of science (2011)
0.07
0.07099311 = product of:
0.10648966 = sum of:
0.08966068 = weight(_text_:systematic in 4186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08966068 = score(doc=4186,freq=2.0), product of:
0.28397155 = queryWeight, product of:
5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
0.049684696 = queryNorm
0.31573826 = fieldWeight in 4186, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4186)
0.016828977 = product of:
0.033657953 = sum of:
0.033657953 = weight(_text_:22 in 4186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033657953 = score(doc=4186,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.049684696 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4186, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4186)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
- Abstract
- The Impact Factors (IFs) of the Institute for Scientific Information suffer from a number of drawbacks, among them the statistics-Why should one use the mean and not the median?-and the incomparability among fields of science because of systematic differences in citation behavior among fields. Can these drawbacks be counteracted by fractionally counting citation weights instead of using whole numbers in the numerators? (a) Fractional citation counts are normalized in terms of the citing sources and thus would take into account differences in citation behavior among fields of science. (b) Differences in the resulting distributions can be tested statistically for their significance at different levels of aggregation. (c) Fractional counting can be generalized to any document set including journals or groups of journals, and thus the significance of differences among both small and large sets can be tested. A list of fractionally counted IFs for 2008 is available online at http:www.leydesdorff.net/weighted_if/weighted_if.xls The between-group variance among the 13 fields of science identified in the U.S. Science and Engineering Indicators is no longer statistically significant after this normalization. Although citation behavior differs largely between disciplines, the reflection of these differences in fractionally counted citation distributions can not be used as a reliable instrument for the classification.
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 12:51:07
-
Leydesdorff, L.; Opthof, T.: Scopus's source normalized impact per paper (SNIP) versus a journal impact factor based on fractional counting of citations (2010)
0.04
0.03586427 = product of:
0.10759281 = sum of:
0.10759281 = weight(_text_:systematic in 4107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10759281 = score(doc=4107,freq=2.0), product of:
0.28397155 = queryWeight, product of:
5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
0.049684696 = queryNorm
0.3788859 = fieldWeight in 4107, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4107)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Impact factors (and similar measures such as the Scimago Journal Rankings) suffer from two problems: (a) citation behavior varies among fields of science and, therefore, leads to systematic differences, and (b) there are no statistics to inform us whether differences are significant. The recently introduced "source normalized impact per paper" indicator of Scopus tries to remedy the first of these two problems, but a number of normalization decisions are involved, which makes it impossible to test for significance. Using fractional counting of citations-based on the assumption that impact is proportionate to the number of references in the citing documents-citations can be contextualized at the paper level and aggregated impacts of sets can be tested for their significance. It can be shown that the weighted impact of Annals of Mathematics (0.247) is not so much lower than that of Molecular Cell (0.386) despite a five-f old difference between their impact factors (2.793 and 13.156, respectively).
-
Leydesdorff, L.; Salah, A.A.A.: Maps on the basis of the Arts & Humanities Citation Index : the journals Leonardo and Art Journal versus "digital humanities" as a topic (2010)
0.01
0.0080434345 = product of:
0.024130303 = sum of:
0.024130303 = product of:
0.048260607 = sum of:
0.048260607 = weight(_text_:indexing in 3436) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048260607 = score(doc=3436,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
0.049684696 = queryNorm
0.2537542 = fieldWeight in 3436, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3436)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Theme
- Citation indexing
-
Leydesdorff, L.; Opthof, T.: Citation analysis with medical subject Headings (MeSH) using the Web of Knowledge : a new routine (2013)
0.01
0.0080434345 = product of:
0.024130303 = sum of:
0.024130303 = product of:
0.048260607 = sum of:
0.048260607 = weight(_text_:indexing in 943) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048260607 = score(doc=943,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
0.049684696 = queryNorm
0.2537542 = fieldWeight in 943, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=943)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Theme
- Citation indexing
-
Leydesdorff, L.; Bornmann, L.; Wagner, C.S.: ¬The relative influences of government funding and international collaboration on citation impact (2019)
0.01
0.0067315903 = product of:
0.02019477 = sum of:
0.02019477 = product of:
0.04038954 = sum of:
0.04038954 = weight(_text_:22 in 4681) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04038954 = score(doc=4681,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.049684696 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4681, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4681)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 8. 1.2019 18:22:45
-
Leydesdorff, L.; Moya-Anegón, F.de; Guerrero-Bote, V.P.: Journal maps on the basis of Scopus data : a comparison with the Journal Citation Reports of the ISI (2010)
0.01
0.0067028617 = product of:
0.020108584 = sum of:
0.020108584 = product of:
0.04021717 = sum of:
0.04021717 = weight(_text_:indexing in 3335) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04021717 = score(doc=3335,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
0.049684696 = queryNorm
0.21146181 = fieldWeight in 3335, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3335)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Theme
- Citation indexing
-
Hellsten, I.; Leydesdorff, L.: ¬The construction of interdisciplinarity : the development of the knowledge base and programmatic focus of the journal Climatic Change, 1977-2013 (2016)
0.01
0.005609659 = product of:
0.016828977 = sum of:
0.016828977 = product of:
0.033657953 = sum of:
0.033657953 = weight(_text_:22 in 3089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033657953 = score(doc=3089,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.049684696 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3089, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3089)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 24. 8.2016 17:53:22
-
Leydesdorff, L.; Johnson, M.W.; Ivanova, I.: Toward a calculus of redundancy : signification, codification, and anticipation in cultural evolution (2018)
0.01
0.005609659 = product of:
0.016828977 = sum of:
0.016828977 = product of:
0.033657953 = sum of:
0.033657953 = weight(_text_:22 in 4463) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033657953 = score(doc=4463,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.049684696 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4463, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4463)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 29. 9.2018 11:22:09
