The DOI matches its Crossref record; 38 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Source normalized indicators of citation impact: an overview of different approaches and an empirical comparison
Open accessOverview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“For instance, the citing-side subject normalization approach was determined as being the most objective and appropriate for field normalization, when compared to normalization that is based on predefined subject classification schemes, especially in the case of multidisciplinary journals [180,185,235].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [180]
Citations
Cites
Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact
Radicchi, F., Fortunato, S., & Castellano, C. (2008) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0806977105 · Cited by 828
A new methodology for constructing a publication‐level classification system of science
Waltman, L., & van Eck, N. J. (2012) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.22748 · Cited by 700
Self-citationMeasuring Contextual Citation Impact of Scientific Journals
Moed, H. F. (2010) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2010.01.002 · Cited by 628
Moed, H. F., Bruin, R. E. D., & van Leeuwen, T. N. (1995) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/bf02017338 · Cited by 502
Towards a new crown indicator: Some theoretical considerations
Waltman, L., van Eck, N. J., van Leeuwen, T. N., Visser, M. S., & van Raan, A. F. J. (2010) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2010.08.001 · Cited by 438
Self-citationvan Leeuwen, T. N., Moed, H. F., Tijssen, R., Visser, M. S., & van Raan, A. F. J. (2001) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1023/a:1010549719484 · Cited by 433
Clustering thescience citation index ® using co-citations
Small, H., & Sweeney, E. (1985) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/bf02017157 · Cited by 288
Lifting the crown—citation z-score
Lundberg, J. (2007) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2006.09.007 · Cited by 284
van Eck, N. J., Waltman, L., van Raan, A. F. J., Klautz, R. J. M., & Peul, W. C. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0062395 · Cited by 253
Self-citationModifying the journal impact factor by fractional citation weighting: The audience factor
Zitt, M., & Small, H. G. (2008) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.20880 · Cited by 184
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World
Pranckutė, R. (2021) · Publications · doi:10.3390/publications9010012 · Cited by 2,696
A review of the literature on citation impact indicators
Waltman, L. (2016) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2016.02.007 · Cited by 1,356
Self-citationCitations, Citation Indicators, and Research Quality: An Overview of Basic Concepts and Theories
Aksnes, D. W., Langfeldt, L., & Wouters, P. (2019) · Sage Open · doi:10.1177/2158244019829575 · Cited by 1,257
A Review of Theory and Practice in Scientometrics
Mingers, J., & Leydesdorff, L. (2015) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2015.04.002 · Cited by 1,002
van Eck, N. J., Waltman, L., van Raan, A. F. J., Klautz, R. J. M., & Peul, W. C. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0062395 · Cited by 253
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Waltman, L., & van Eck, N. J.
- Affiliations
- Leiden University (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Waltman, Ludo
- ORCID
- Waltman, Ludo
- Venue
- Scientometrics
- Published
- 2012-11-23
- Volume
- 96
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 699-716
- ISSN
- 0138-9130 (ISSN-L)
- 1588-2861
- OpenAlex
- W2165235748
- Cited by
- 155
- References
- 41
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 14.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Scientometrics (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Web visibility and informetrics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
- Keywords
- citation impact, field normalization, citation practices, journal selection
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
