Library and Information Service >
Theoretical and Empirical Study on Measure Method of Academic Influence Indicator Based on ESI
Received date: 2012-08-16
Revised date: 2012-11-19
Online published: 2013-01-20
Citation Analysis is an important bibliometric tool and method in academic influence evaluation. There are various academic influence evaluation indicators based on the citation analysis. Two representative indicators of Crown indicator of CWTS and percentiles proposed by Bornman are widely applied. Computing of Indicator is often tedious because it is hard to acquire the necessary citation data. This paper proposes a simple framework for computing indicators based on ESI and Web of Science. It realizes the academic influence evaluation of China Agricultural University, to provide the reference for academic influence evaluation of other institute or research entities.
Key words： ESI; academic influence; relative citation rate; MNCS; percentiles
Chen Shiji , Shi Liwen , Zuo Wenge . Theoretical and Empirical Study on Measure Method of Academic Influence Indicator Based on ESI[J]. Library and Information Service, 2013 , 57(02) : 97 -102,123 . DOI: 10.7536/j.issn.0252-3116.2013.02.019
[1] Schubert A, Braun T. Cross-field normalization of scientometric indicators[J]. Scientometrics, 1996, 36(3): 311-324.
[2] Schubert A, Braun T. Reference standards for citation based assessments[J]. Scientometrics, 1993, 26(1): 21-35.
[3] Schubert A, Braun T. Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact[J]. Scientometrics, 1986, 9(5): 281-291.
[4] Vinkler P. Model for quantitative selection of relative scientometric impact indicators[J]. Scientometrics, 1996, 36(2): 223-236.
[5] Vinkler P. Evaluation of some methods for the relative assessment of scientific publications[J]. Scientometrics, 1986, 10(3): 157-177.
[6] Glanzel W, Thijs B, Schubert A, et al. Subfield-specific normalized relative indicators and a new generation of relational charts: Methodological foundations illustrated on the assessment of institutional research performance[J]. Scientometrics, 2009, 78(1): 165-188.
[7] van Raan A F J. The use of bibliometric analysis in research performance assessment and monitoring of interdisciplinary scientific developments[J]. Assessment Theory and Practice, 2003, 1(12): 20-29.
[8] Seglen P O. The skewness of science[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1992, 43(9): 628-638.
[9] Bornmann L. Towards an ideal method of measuring research performance: Some comments to the opthof and leydesdorff (2010) paper [J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2010, 4(3): 441-443.
[10] Bornmann L, Mutz R, Neuhaus C, et al. Citation counts for research evaluation: Standards of good practice for analyzing bibliometric data and presenting and interpreting results[J]. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 2008, 8: 93-102.
[11] National Science Board. Science and engineering indicators 2010[R]. Arlington: National Science Foundation, 2010.
[12] SCImago research group. SCIMago institutions rankings [R/OL]. [2012-08-10]. http://www.scimagoir.com/pdf/sir_2011_world_report_ni.pdf.
[13] Centre for science and technology studies, Leiden University the netherlands. Leiden ranking[EB/OL]. [2012-02-13]. http://www.leidenranking.com/default.aspx.
[14] Zhou Ping, Leydesdorff L. Fractional counting of citations in research evaluation: A cross and interdisciplinary assessment of the Tsinghua University in Beijing[J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2011, 5(3): 360-368.
[15] Colliander C, Ahlgren P. The effects and their stability of field normalization baseline on relative performance with respect to citation impact: A case study of 20 natural science departments[J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2011, 5(1): 101-113.
[16] 陈仕吉,史丽文,左文革. 科研机构潜势学科的识别方法与实证分析——以中国农业大学为例[J]. 情报杂志, 2012,31(2): 43-47.
[17] Waltman L, van Eck N, van Leeuwen T, et al. Towards a new crown indicator: An empirical analysis[J]. Scientometrics, 2011, 87(3): 467-481.
[18] Waltman L, van Eck N J, van Leeuwen T N, et al. Towards a new crown indicator: Some theoretical considerations[J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2011, 5(1): 37-47.
[19] Radicchia F, Fortunato S, Castellano C. Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2008, 105 (45): 17268-17272.
[20] Waltman L, van Eck N J, van Raan A F J. Universality of citation distributions revisited[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2012, 63(1): 72-77.
[21] Bornmann L, Daniel H. Universality of citation distributions–A validation of Radicchi et al.'s relative indicator cf = c/c0 at the micro level using data from chemistry[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2009, 60(8): 1664-1670.
[22] Bornmann L, Mutz R. Further steps towards an ideal method of measuring citation performance: The avoidance of citation (ratio) averages in field-normalization[J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2011, 5(1): 228-230.
[23] Rousseau R. 评价科研机构的文献计量学和经济计量学指标[C]// 蒋国华. 科研评价与指标: 大学科研评价量化问题国际研讨会暨第五次全国科学计量学与情报计量学学术年会论文集. 北京: 红旗出版社, 2000:17-23.
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
