Professional and Citizen Bibliometrics: Complementarities and Ambivalences in the Development and Use of Indicators—a State-of-the-Art Report
Open accessAbstract
Bibliometric indicators such as journal impact factors,h-indices, and total citation counts are algorithmic artifacts that can be used in research evaluation and management. These artifacts have no meaning by themselves, but receive their meaning from attributions in institutional practices. We distinguish four main stakeholders in these practices: (1) producers of bibliometric data and indicators; (2) bibliometricians who develop and test indicators; (3) research managers who apply the indicators; and (4) the scientists being evaluated with potentially competing career interests. These different positions may lead to different and sometimes conflicting perspectives on the meaning and value of the indicators. The indicators can thus be considered as boundary objects which are socially constructed in translations among these perspectives. This paper proposes an analytical clarification by listing an informed set of (sometimes unsolved) problems in bibliometrics which can also shed light on the tension between simple but invalid indicators that are widely used (e.g., the h-index) and more sophisticated indicators that are not used or cannot be used in evaluation practices because they are not transparent for users, cannot be calculated, or are difficult to interpret.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
The quality of data is very important, especially in performing bibliometric analyses.
“However, while it is not arguable that comprehensiveness of coverage is essential for any task, the quality of data is also very important, especially in performing bibliometric analyses [4,40].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [4]
Most DBs users do not have the necessary competence to make the most suitable choice and need a trusted source of DB's descriptive information.
“Yet, most of the DBs users do not have the necessary competence to make the most suitable choice and, therefore, need a trusted source of DB's descriptive information [4,25].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [4]
Discrepancies in publication metadata, source information, or other inconsistencies in bibliographic databases complicate analysis and can negatively affect the accuracy and reliability of obtained results.
“all of the discrepancies in the publication metadata, source information, or other inconsistencies occurring in the DBs not only complicate analysis and other tasks, but can also negatively affect the accuracy and reliability of the obtained results [4,61,95].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [4]
Only a minority of stakeholders employing bibliometric indicators are adequately familiar with their meaning and appropriate use.
“Yet, only a minority of stakeholders employing bibliometric indicators are adequately familiar with their meaning and appropriate use [2,4,5,7].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [4]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output
Hirsch, J. E. (2005) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0507655102 · Cited by 11,669 · see citing works
Duflo, E. (2019) · AEA Papers and Proceedings · doi:10.1257/pandp.109.612 · Cited by 11,235 · see citing works
Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989) · Social Studies of Science · doi:10.1177/030631289019003001 · Cited by 10,847 · see citing works
Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society
Bijker, W. E., & Latour, B. (1988) · Technology and Culture · doi:10.2307/3105094 · Cited by 10,768 · see citing works
(1987) · Cited by 8,955 · see citing works
The New production of knowledge: the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies
Gibbons, M. (1995) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.32-4463 · Cited by 7,049 · see citing works
Gieryn, T. F. (1983) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2095325 · Cited by 4,838 · see citing works
Ecological Correlations and the Behavior of Individuals
Robinson, W. S. (1950) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2087176 · Cited by 4,547 · see citing works
The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies.
Baber, Z., Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. A. (1995) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2076669 · Cited by 4,408 · see citing works
Group-Based Modeling of Development
NAGIN, D. (2005) · doi:10.4159/9780674041318 · Cited by 4,164 · see citing works
Price, D. J. D. S. (1965) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.149.3683.510 · Cited by 3,121 · see citing works
Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for Research Metrics
Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L., de Rijcke, S., & Rafols, I. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/520429a · Cited by 2,828 · see citing works
Self-citationGarfield, E. (1972) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.178.4060.471 · Cited by 2,788 · cited 2× · see citing works
“However, the Journal Impact Factor (JIF) was explicitly defined by Garfield in terms of citations to the last two previous years of journal publications because in biochemistry the research front develops so rapidly (Bensman 2007; de Solla Price 1970; Garfield 1972; Martyn and Gilchrist 1968).”
BackgroundWhy the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research
Seglen, P. O. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.314.7079.497 · Cited by 2,447 · cited 2× · see citing works
“JIFs may correlate poorly with the actual citation rates of most of the papers published in a journal (Seglen, 1997) since a few highly cited papers in a journal may have a very strong influence on the JIF.”
BackgroundTheory and practise of the g-index
Egghe, L. (2006) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0144-7 · Cited by 2,354 · see citing works
Citation Indexing-Its Theory and Application in Science, Technology, and Humanities
Goodwin, J., & Garfield, E. (1980) · Technology and Culture · doi:10.2307/3104125 · Cited by 1,648 · see citing works
Opening Pandora's Box: A Sociological Analysis of Scientists' Discourse.
Gieryn, T. F., Gilbert, N., & Mulkay, M. (1985) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2070471 · Cited by 1,576 · see citing works
Stirling, A. (2008) · Science, Technology, & Human Values · doi:10.1177/0162243907311265 · Cited by 1,567 · see citing works
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 · see citing works
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 · see citing works
Self-citationIs citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool?
Garfield, E. (1979) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/bf02019306 · Cited by 911 · see citing works
Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the Social Sciences and the Humanities: A Review
Nederhof, A. J. (2006) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0007-2 · Cited by 785 · see citing works
Wilsdon, J., Allen, L., Belfiore, E., Campbell, P., Curry, S., Hill, S. A., Jones, R. D., Kain, R. J. P., Kerridge, S., Thelwall, M. A., et al. (2015) · Digital Education Resource Archive (University College London) · doi:10.13140/rg.2.1.4929.1363 · Cited by 738 · see citing works
Self-citationHarzing, A.-W. K. (2007) · Cited by 734 · see citing works
Productivity, R&D, and the Data Constraint
Griliches, Z. (1998) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-7506-7009-8.50019-7 · Cited by 680 · see citing works
Hierarchy Theory: The Challenge of Complex Systems
Pattee, H. H. (1973) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 678 · see citing works
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 667 · see citing works
Measuring Contextual Citation Impact of Scientific Journals
Moed, H. F. (2010) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2010.01.002 · Cited by 628 · see citing works
The Organization of Complex Systems
Simon, H. A. (1977) · Boston studies in the philosophy of science · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-9521-1_14 · Cited by 594 · see citing works
Ràfols, I., Loet Leydesdorff, A., O’Hare, A., Nightingale, P., & Stirling, A. (2012) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2012.03.015 · Cited by 581 · see citing works
Moed, H. F., Bruin, R. E. D., & van Leeuwen, T. N. (1995) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/bf02017338 · Cited by 502 · see citing works
Communication among scientists and engineers
Nelson, C. E., & Pollock, D. (1970) · Cited by 472 · see citing works
The Leiden ranking 2011/2012: Data collection, indicators, and interpretation
Waltman, L., Calero‐Medina, C., Kosten, J., Noyons, E., Tijssen, R., van Eck, N. J., van Leeuwen, T. N., van Raan, A. F. J., Visser, M. S., & Wouters, P. F. (2012) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.22708 · Cited by 452 · see citing works
Self-citationSchubert, A. P., & Braun, T. (1986) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/bf02017249 · Cited by 450 · see citing works
Citation time window choice for research impact evaluation
Wang, J. (2012) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0775-9 · Cited by 427 · see citing works
Psychological relevance and information science
Harter, S. P. (1992) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-4571(199210)43:9 · Cited by 415 · see citing works
Poverty, human development and growth : an emerging consensus?
Aturupane, H. (1994) · American Economic Review · Cited by 365 · see citing works
The inconsistency of the h‐index
Waltman, L., & van Eck, N. J. (2011) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.21678 · Cited by 338 · see citing works
Is Google Scholar useful for bibliometrics? A webometric analysis
Aguillo, I. F. (2011) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0582-8 · Cited by 302 · see citing works
Larivière, V., Archambault, É., Gingras, Y., & Vignola-Gagné, É. (2006) · J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. · doi:10.1002/asi.20349 · Cited by 294 · see citing works
Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., Hug, S. E., & Daniel, H. (2011) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2011.01.006 · Cited by 283 · see citing works
Self-citationToward a Metric of Science: The Advent of Science Indicators.
Wilken, P. H., Elkana, Y., Lederberg, J., Merton, R. Κ., Thackray, A. W., & Zuckerman, H. (1979) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2577293 · Cited by 280 · see citing works
Delgado López‐Cózar, E., Robinson‐García, N., & Torres‐Salinas, D. (2014) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.23056 · Cited by 272 · see citing works
Near decomposability and the speed of evolution
Simon, H. E. (2002) · Industrial and Corporate Change · doi:10.1093/icc/11.3.587 · Cited by 264 · see citing works
Dahler‐Larsen, P. (2011) · Stanford University Press eBooks · doi:10.11126/stanford/9780804776929.001.0001 · Cited by 250 · see citing works
Tijssen, R., Visser, M. S., & van Leeuwen, T. N. (2002) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1023/a:1016082432660 · Cited by 243 · see citing works
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 239 · see citing works
Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., & Daniel, H.-D. (2010) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0014331 · Cited by 231 · cited 1× · see citing works
“On the contrary, the index has been extensively used in an expanding literature of research papers with the aim of proposing optimized h-index variants (Bornmann et al. 2011a, b).”
MethodSelf-citationHarzing, A.-W. K. (2012) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0777-7 · Cited by 222 · see citing works
A simple proposal for the publication of journal citation distributionsPreprint
Larivière, V., Kiermer, V., MacCallum, C. J., Mcnutt, M. K., Patterson, M., Pulverer, B., Swaminathan, S., Taylor, S., & Curry, S. (2016) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/062109 · Cited by 216 · see citing works
Oswald, A. J. (2007) · Economica · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0335.2006.00575.x · Cited by 214 · see citing works
Algorithmic procedure for finding semantically related journals
Pudovkin, A. I., & Garfield, E. (2002) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.10153 · Cited by 211 · see citing works
Bornmann, L., Loet Leydesdorff, A., & Mutz, R. (2012) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2012.10.001 · Cited by 205 · see citing works
Self-citationSome Modifications to the SNIP Journal Impact Indicator
Waltman, L., van Eck, N. J., van Leeuwen, T. N., & Visser, M. S. (2013) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2012.11.011 · Cited by 191 · see citing works
Zitt, M., Ramanana-Rahary, S., & Bassecoulard, E. (2005) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-005-0218-y · Cited by 182 · see citing works
Turning the tables on citation analysis one more time: Principles for comparing sets of documents
Loet Leydesdorff, A., Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., & Tobias Opthof, A. (2011) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.21534 · Cited by 170 · see citing works
Self-citationLoet Leydesdorff, A., & Bornmann, L. (2011) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.21609 · Cited by 164 · see citing works
Self-citationBornmann, L., & Mutz, R. (2010) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2010.10.009 · Cited by 154 · see citing works
Self-citationA Systematic Empirical Comparison of Different Approaches for Normalizing Citation Impact Indicators
Waltman, L., & van Eck, N. J. (2013) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2013.08.002 · Cited by 153 · see citing works
Ràfols, I., & Loet Leydesdorff, A. (2009) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.21086 · Cited by 150 · see citing works
Garfield and the impact factor
Bensman, S. J. (2007) · Annual Review of Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/aris.2007.1440410110 · Cited by 145 · see citing works
Bornmann, L., & Marx, W. (2013) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-013-1161-y · Cited by 143 · see citing works
Self-citationCitations: Indicators of Quality? The Impact Fallacy
Loet Leydesdorff, A., Bornmann, L., Comins, J. A., & Milojević, S. (2016) · Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics · doi:10.3389/frma.2016.00001 · Cited by 142 · see citing works
Self-citationA longitudinal study of Google Scholar coverage between 2012 and 2013
Harzing, A.-W. K. (2013) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-013-0975-y · Cited by 141 · see citing works
Rushforth, A., & de Rijcke, S. (2015) · Minerva · doi:10.1007/s11024-015-9274-5 · Cited by 132 · see citing works
Leydesdorff, L., & Bornmann, L. (2016) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.23408 · Cited by 129 · see citing works
Self-citationRuiz‐Castillo, J., & Waltman, L. (2014) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2014.11.010 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
Prins, A., Costas, R., van Leeuwen, T. N., & Wouters, P. F. (2016) · Research Evaluation · doi:10.1093/reseval/rvv049 · Cited by 112 · see citing works
Self-citationCitation Metrics: A Primer on How (Not) to Normalize
Ioannidis, J. P. A., Boyack, K. W., & Wouters, P. F. (2016) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002542 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
Self-citationA farewell to the MNCS and like size-independent indicators
Abramo, G., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2016) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2016.04.006 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
Bornmann, L., Thor, A., Marx, W., & Schier, H. (2016) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.23627 · Cited by 74 · see citing works
Self-citationThe significance of the number of highly cited papers as an indicator of scientific prolificacy
Plomp, R. (1990) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/bf02095346 · Cited by 72 · see citing works
Baumgartner, S. E., & Loet Leydesdorff, A. (2013) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.23009 · Cited by 71 · see citing works
Bornmann, L., & Leydesdorff, L. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0056768 · Cited by 69 · see citing works
Self-citationCitation counts and social comparisons: Scientists' use and evaluation of citation index data
Hargens, L. L., & Schuman, H. (1990) · Social Science Research · doi:10.1016/0049-089x(90)90006-5 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Google Scholar Metrics for Publications
Jacsó, P. (2012) · Online Information Review · doi:10.1108/14684521211254121 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
Neuhaus, C., & Daniel, H. (2008) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-007-2007-2 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
A farewell to the MNCS and like size-independent indicators
Abramo, G., & D’Angelo, C. A. (n.d.) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Special features of historical papers from the viewpoint of bibliometrics
Marx, W. (2011) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.21479 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Google Scholar Author Citation Tracker: is it too little, too late?
Jacsó, P. (2012) · Online Information Review · doi:10.1108/14684521211209581 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
An evaluation of British scientific journals
Martyn, J. R. C., & Gilchrist, A. (1968) · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Toward a Metric of Science: The Advent of Science Indicators.
Wasserman, S. S., Elkana, Y., Lederberg, J., et al. (1980) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2287482 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Citation analysis with medical subject Headings ( MeSH ) using the W eb of K nowledge: A new routine
Loet Leydesdorff, A., & Tobias Opthof, A. (2013) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.22770 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
van den Daele, W., & Weingart, P. (1975) · Zeitschrift für Soziologie · doi:10.1515/zfsoz-1975-0204 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
A classification of the use of research indicators
Kosten, J. (2016) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-016-1904-7 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
The danger of pseudoscience in Informetrics
Spaan, J. A. E. (2010) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2010.03.010 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
The See-Saw Effect: a multilevel problem?
Kreft, G. G., & de Leeuw, E. D. (1988) · Quality & Quantity · doi:10.1007/bf00223037 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Azrout, R., van Spanje, J., & de Vreese, C. H. (2012) · Acta Politica · doi:10.1057/ap.2012.20 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Benchmarking Individual Publication Productivity in Logistics
Coleman, B., BOLUMOLE, Y. A., & Frankel, R. (2012) · Transportation Journal · doi:10.5325/transportationj.51.2.0164 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Two h-Index Benchmarks for Evaluating the Publication Performance of Medical Informatics Researchers
Emam, K. E., Arbuckle, L., Jonker, E., & Anderson, K. (2012) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.2177 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Is citation normalization realistic?
Kostoff, R. N., & Martinez, W. L. (2004) · Journal of Information Science · doi:10.1177/0165551505049260 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Matching M edline/ P ub M ed data with W eb of S cience: A routine in R language
Rotolo, D., & Leydesdorff, L. (2014) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.23385 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Self-citationScopus' SNIP indicator: Reply to Moed
Loet Leydesdorff, A., & Tobias Opthof, A. (2010) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.21405 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Problems with the SNIP indicator
Mingers, J. (2014) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2014.09.004 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Ahlgren, P., Persson, O., & Rousseau, R. W. (2014) · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Casti J Alternate realities 1989 New York Wiley
- Rotolo D Leydesdorff L Matching Medline/PubMed data with Web of Science: A routine in R language Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 2015
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 · see citing works
Citations, 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 · see citing works
Self-citationDimensions: Building Context for Search and Evaluation
Hook, D. W., Porter, S. J., & Herzog, C. (2018) · Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics · doi:10.3389/frma.2018.00023 · Cited by 325 · see citing works
The Application of Bibliometric Analysis: Disciplinary and User Aspects
Ellegaard, O. (2018) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-018-2765-z · Cited by 253 · see citing works
Bornmann, L., & Leydesdorff, L. (2017) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2016.12.001 · Cited by 72 · see citing works
Self-citationEvaluating Research and Researchers by the Journal Impact Factor: Is It Better than Coin Flipping?
Brito, R., & Rodríguez-Navarro, A. (2019) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2019.01.009 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Critical Rationalism and the Search for Standard (Field-Normalized) Indicators in Bibliometrics
Bornmann, L., & Marx, W. (2018) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2018.05.002 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Leydesdorff, L., Wouters, P., & Bornmann, L.
- Affiliations
- Leiden University (NL)
- Max Planck Society (DE)
- Venue
- Scientometrics
- Published
- 2016-10-03
- Volume
- 109
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 2129-2150
- ISSN
- 0138-9130 (ISSN-L)
- 1588-2861
- PMC
- PMC5124044
- OpenAlex
- W2523550674
- Cited by
- 173
- References
- 95
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 17.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Scientometrics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › 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
- bibliometric indicators, research evaluation, boundary objects, h-index, journal impact factor, citation counts, research management, stakeholder perspectives, social construction of meaning, indicator validity, scientific careers
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
