A review of the literature on citation impact indicators

Waltman, Ludo

doi:10.1016/j.joi.2016.02.007

Cited by 1,356scientometrics and bibliometrics researchWeb visibility and informetricsPsychology Research and Bibliometrics

A review of the literature on citation impact indicators

Waltman, Ludo·2016·Journal of Informetrics

DOI 10.1016/j.joi.2016.02.007

Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Citation impact indicators nowadays play an important role in research evaluation, and consequently these indicators have received a lot of attention in the bibliometric and scientometric literature. This paper provides an in-depth review of the literature on citation impact indicators. First, an overview is given of the literature on bibliographic databases that can be used to calculate citation impact indicators (Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar). Next, selected topics in the literature on citation impact indicators are reviewed in detail. The first topic is the selection of publications and citations to be included in the calculation of citation impact indicators. The second topic is the normalization of citation impact indicators, in particular normalization for field differences. Counting methods for dealing with co-authored publications are the third topic, and citation impact indicators for journals are the last topic. The paper concludes by offering some recommendations for future research.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.joi.2016.02.007

Cites

359 of 359 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

When citations are missing, inaccurate, or fabricated, the resulting break in the evidence chain can obscure logical dependencies, weaken argumentation, and jeopardize academic integrity.
“When citations are missing, inaccurate, or fabricated, the resulting break in the evidence chain can obscure logical dependencies, weaken argumentation, and jeopardize academic integrity at the level of both individual papers and the broader literature [10, 22, 26].”
From CiteAudit: You Cited It, But Did You Read It? A Benchmark for Verifying Scientific References in the LLM Era (2026) · cites this paper as [26]
Having a larger citation window is known to influence citation counts.
“having a larger citation window (i.e., time period after publication in which an article can be cited) is known to influence citation counts (Waltman, 2016).”
From Graphical abstracts are associated with greater Altmetric attention scores, but not citations, in sport science (2023) · cites this paper as Waltman, 2016
Information provided in early studies performed more than several years ago may have become obsolete and could be misleading.
“Moreover, because DBs are continuously expanding both their contents and capabilities, the information provided in the early studies, performed more than several years ago, may have become obsolete and, thus, could be misleading [26].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [26]
The coverage of books and conference proceedings both in WoS and Scopus was generally determined to be insufficient for analyzing or evaluating disciplines where these source types are the most prevalent.
“Therefore, it is not surprising that the coverage of books and conference proceedings both in WoS and Scopus was generally determined to be insufficient, aiming to use the DBs as the data sources for analyzing or evaluating disciplines where these source types are the most prevalent [26,44,88].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [26]
In Computer sciences, research findings tend to be published in conference papers, while books and text-books are more important sources in social sciences and even more so in humanities.
“For example, it is well known that, in Computer sciences, the research findings tend to be published in conference papers [86,87], while books and text-books are more important sources in social sciences and even more so in humanities [26,46].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [26]

The majority of studies determined better coverage of conference material in Scopus when compared to WoS.
“However, although the share of conference proceedings articles in Scopus and in WoS is statistically similar (approximately 10%) [52], the majority of studies determined better coverage of conference material in Scopus when compared to WoS [26,39,53,55,57,59].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [26]
Scopus provides higher citation counts than WoS, even before the Scopus Cited Reference Expansion Program.
“Scopus was shown to provide higher citation counts than WoS, even in the studies that were performed before an execution of Scopus Cited Reference Expansion Program, when the citations in Scopus were only covered up to 1996 [26,44,60].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [26]
Results of publication analysis involving various types of documents could be affected by inconsistencies in document types between the DBs.
“The results of publication analysis involving various types of documents could also be affected by the inconsistencies in document types between the DBs”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [26]
In analyses by document types, these publications would be counted twice, while citation counts per publication might decrease.
“in analyses by document types these publications would be counted twice, while citation counts per publication might decrease”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [26]
Over twenty different bibliometric indicators are currently available, and new versions or alternative metrics are still being actively developed.
“Consequently, over twenty different bibliometric indicators are currently available, and new versions or alternative metrics are still being actively developed [26].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [26]
The short two-year citation time window of JIF is even more obvious when applying JIF in subject fields where citations mature slower or are delayed, as in Mathematics, Social Sciences and Humanities.
“This issue is even more obvious when applying JIF in subject fields where citations mature slower or are delayed, as in Mathematics, Social Sciences and Humanities [26,46,224,229].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [26]
Possibilities to export or download data from the web-interfaces for external analyses are usually limited, and the number of data rows available to export in one batch differs between the databases.
“Possibilities to export or download data from the web-interfaces for external analyses are also usually limited, and the number of data rows available to export in one batch differs between the DBs [9,26].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [26]
WoS also calculates an Immediacy index, which is basically a one-year JIF.
“WoS also calculates an Immediacy index, which is basically a one-year JIF [26,45].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [26]
Another possibility for analyzing larger data sets is to use additional online tools, such as InCites for WoS data and SciVal for Scopus data.
“Another possibility for analyzing larger data sets is to use additional online tools, such as InCites (for WoS data) and SciVal (for Scopus data) [26,219].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [26]
JIF shows a certain level of discrimination against less popular publication types that, in certain disciplines, are as important as original research articles.
“In this way, JIF also shows a certain level of discrimination against less popular publication types that, in certain disciplines, are as important as original research articles [2,26,45,46,224,225,229].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [26]
Generally, the WoS subject classification scheme is most commonly used for normalization purposes.
“Generally, the WoS subject classification scheme is most commonly used for normalization purposes [26].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [26]
Evaluations of larger entities such as research or academic institutions and countries can only compare those similar in size.
“The same applies in evaluations of larger entities, such as research or academic institutions and countries, since they can only be compared to those that are similar in size [2,26].”
From Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021) · cites this paper as [26]

The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual Web search engine
Brin, S., & Page, L. (1998) · Computer Networks and ISDN Systems · doi:10.1016/s0169-7552(98)00110-x · Cited by 16,004 · see citing works
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
The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis
Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5 · Cited by 5,274 · see citing works
Visualizing Bibliometric Networks
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2014) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-10377-8_13 · Cited by 3,630 · see citing works
Self-citation
The Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge
Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1136099 · Cited by 3,615 · 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-citation
Citation Analysis as a Tool in Journal Evaluation: Journals can be ranked by frequency and impact of citations for science policy studies.
Garfield, E. (1972) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.178.4060.471 · Cited by 2,788 · see citing works
The History and Meaning of the Journal Impact Factor
Garfield, E. (2006) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.295.1.90 · Cited by 2,770 · see citing works
Why 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 · see citing works
Theory and practise of the g-index
Egghe, L. (2006) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0144-7 · Cited by 2,354 · see citing works
Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: A Longitudinal and Cross-Disciplinary Comparison
Harzing, A.-W., & Alakangas, S. (2016) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1798-9 · Cited by 1,784 · see citing works
What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior
Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. (2008) · Journal of Documentation · doi:10.1108/00220410810844150 · Cited by 1,607 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Furthermore, this review also does not cover literature on the meaning of citations (Bornmann & Daniel, 2008; Nicolaisen, 2007), literature on the practical application of citation impact indicators in the context of research evaluation, and literature on the correlation between citation impact…”
Background
Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation
Moed, H. F. (2005) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/1-4020-3714-7 · Cited by 1,334 · 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
Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of science versus scopus and google scholar
Meho, L. I., & Yang, K. (2007) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.20677 · Cited by 974 · see citing works
The rate of growth in scientific publication and the decline in coverage provided by Science Citation Index
Larsen, P. O., & von Ins, M. (2010) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-010-0202-z · Cited by 964 · see citing works
A new approach to the metric of journals’ scientific prestige: The SJR indicator
González-Pereira, B., Guerrero‐Bote, V. P., & Anegón, F. D. M. (2010) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2010.03.002 · Cited by 867 · see citing works
h-Index: A review focused in its variants, computation and standardization for different scientific fields
Alonso, S., Cabrerizo, F. J., Herrera‐Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2009) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2009.04.001 · Cited by 841 · see citing works
Comparing bibliometric statistics obtained from the Web of Science and Scopus
Archambault, É., Campbell, D., Gingras, Y., & Larivière, V. (2009) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.21062 · Cited by 833 · see citing works
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 · see citing works
Comparisons of Citations in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for Articles Published in General Medical Journals
Kulkarni, A. V. (2009) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2009.1307 · Cited by 821 · 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
Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science
Bakkalbasi, N., Bauer, K., Glover, J., & Wang, L. (2006) · Biomedical Digital Libraries · doi:10.1186/1742-5581-3-7 · Cited by 752 · see citing works
Comparing alternatives to the web of science for coverage of the social sciences’ literature
Norris, M., & Oppenheim, C. (2007) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2006.12.001 · Cited by 733 · see citing works
Which h-index? — A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar
Bar‐Ilan, J. (2007) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-008-0216-y · Cited by 720 · see citing works
CitNetExplorer: A new software tool for analyzing and visualizing citation networks
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2014) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2014.07.006 · Cited by 709 · see citing works
Self-citation
Comparing keywords plus of WOS and author keywords: A case study of patient adherence research
Zhang, J., Yu, Q., Zheng, F., Long, C., Lu, Z., & Duan, Z. (2015) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.23437 · Cited by 693 · see citing works
A Hirsch-type index for journals
Braun, T., Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. P. (2006) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0147-4 · Cited by 669 · 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
Self-citation
Bibliometrics and Citation Analysis: From the Science Citation Index to Cybermetrics
Nicolaisen, J. (2009) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.21181 · Cited by 653 · 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
A comparison of Scopus and Web of Science for a typical university
Vieira, E. S., & Gomes, J. A. N. F. (2009) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-009-2178-0 · Cited by 625 · see citing works
Citation influence for journal aggregates of scientific publications: Theory, with application to the literature of physics
Pinski, G., & Narin, F. (1976) · Information Processing & Management · doi:10.1016/0306-4573(76)90048-0 · Cited by 601 · see citing works
Sleeping Beauties in science
van Raan, A. F. J. (2004) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1023/b:scie.0000018543.82441.f1 · Cited by 579 · see citing works
A Principal Component Analysis of 39 Scientific Impact Measures
Bollen, J., Herbert Van De Sompel, A., Hagberg, A. A., & Chute, R. (2009) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0006022 · Cited by 576 · see citing works
Journal impact measures in bibliometric research
Glänzel, W., & Moed, H. F. (2002) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1023/a:1014848323806 · Cited by 558 · see citing works
Bibliometrics and Citation Analysis: From the Science Citation Index to Cybermetrics
Bellis, N. D. (2009) · IRIS UNIMORE (University of Modena and Reggio Emilia) · Cited by 548 · see citing works
Is it possible to compare researchers with different scientific interests?
Batista, P. D., Campiteli, M. G., & Kinouchi, O. (2006) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0090-4 · Cited by 548 · see citing works
Assessing basic research
Martin, B. R., & Irvine, J. M. (1983) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/0048-7333(83)90005-7 · Cited by 529 · see citing works
Benchmarking scientific output in the social sciences and humanities: The limits of existing databases
Archambault, É., Vignola-Gagné, É., Côté, G., Larivière, V., & Gingrasb, Y. (2006) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0115-z · Cited by 507 · see citing works
Inflationary bibliometric values: The role of scientific collaboration and the need for relative indicators in evaluative studies
Persson, O., Glänzel, W., & Danell, R. (2004) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1023/b:scie.0000034384.35498.7d · Cited by 502 · see citing works
Hyperauthorship: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices?
Cronin, B. (2001) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.1097 · Cited by 500 · see citing works
Fortnightly Review: How can impact factors be improved?
Garfield, E. (1996) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.313.7054.411 · Cited by 491 · see citing works
Team size matters: Collaboration and scientific impact since 1900
Larivière, V., Gingras, Y., Sugimoto, C. R., & Tsou, A. (2015) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.23266 · Cited by 484 · see citing works
Eigenfactor: Measuring the value and prestige of scholarly journals
Bergstrom, C. T. (2007) · College & Research Libraries News · doi:10.5860/crln.68.5.7804 · Cited by 479 · see citing works
Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review
Bar‐Ilan, J. (2008) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2007.11.001 · Cited by 467 · see citing works
Evaluation Practices and Effects of Indicator Use—A Literature Review
Rijcke, S. D., Wouters, P. F., Rushforth, A. D., Franssen, T. P., & Hammarfelt, B. (2016) · Research Evaluation · doi:10.1093/reseval/rvv038 · Cited by 467 · see citing works
Mapping world scientific collaboration: Authors, institutions, and countries
Gazni, A., Sugimoto, C. R., & Didegah, F. (2011) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.21688 · Cited by 456 · 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-citation
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 · see citing works
Self-citation
Language biases in the coverage of the Science Citation Index and its consequencesfor international comparisons of national research performance
van 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 · 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
Large-Scale Analysis of the Accuracy of the Journal Classification Systems of Web of Science and Scopus
Wang, Q., & Waltman, L. (2016) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2016.02.003 · Cited by 417 · see citing works
Self-citation
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
An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output that takes into account the effect of multiple coauthorship
Hirsch, J. E. (2010) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-010-0193-9 · Cited by 411 · see citing works
A Further Step Forward in Measuring Journals’ Scientific Prestige: The SJR2 Indicator
Guerrero-Bote, V. P., & Moya-Anegón, F. (2012) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2012.07.001 · Cited by 406 · see citing works
Journal status
Bollen, J., Rodriquez, M. A., & Herbert Van De Sompel, A. (2006) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0176-z · Cited by 403 · see citing works
A Systematic Review of Research on the Meaning, Ethics and Practices of Authorship across Scholarly Disciplines
Marušić, A., Bošnjak, L., & Jerončić, A. (2011) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0023477 · Cited by 396 · see citing works
The difficulty of achieving full coverage of international social science literature and the bibliometric consequences
Hicks, D. M. (1999) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/bf02457380 · Cited by 391 · see citing works
Web of Science and Scopus: a journal title overlap study
Gavel, Y., & Iselid, L. (2008) · Online Information Review · doi:10.1108/14684520810865958 · Cited by 384 · see citing works
Google Scholar: the pros and the cons
Jacsó, P. (2005) · Online Information Review · doi:10.1108/14684520510598066 · Cited by 383 · see citing works
Citation counting, citation ranking, and h ‐index of human‐computer interaction researchers: A comparison of Scopus and Web of Science
Meho, L. I., & Rogers, Y. (2008) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.20874 · Cited by 383 · see citing works
Impact factor: outdated artefact or stepping-stone to journal certification?
Vanclay, J. K. (2011) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0561-0 · Cited by 370 · see citing works
A macro study of self-citation
Aksnes, D. W. (2003) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1023/a:1021919228368 · Cited by 357 · see citing works
Citation counts for research evaluation: standards of good practice for analyzing bibliometric data and presenting and interpreting results
Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., Neuhaus, C., & Daniel, H. (2007) · Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics · doi:10.3354/esep00084 · Cited by 351 · see citing works
A new classification scheme of science fields and subfields designed for scientometric evaluation purposes
Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. P. (2003) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1023/a:1022378804087 · Cited by 339 · 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
Self-citation
Measuring Scholarly Impact: Methods and Practice
Ding, Y., Rousseau, R., & Wolfram, D. (2014) · Cited by 335 · see citing works
History of the journal impact factor: Contingencies and consequences
Archambault, É., & Larivière, V. (2009) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-007-2036-x · Cited by 326 · see citing works
The Number of Scholarly Documents on the Public Web
Khabsa, M., & Giles, C. L. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0093949 · Cited by 325 · see citing works
How do you define and measure research productivity?
Abramo, G., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2014) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-014-1269-8 · Cited by 325 · see citing works
Field-normalized citation impact indicators and the choice of an appropriate counting method
Waltman, L., & van Eck, N. J. (2015) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2015.08.001 · Cited by 297 · see citing works
Self-citation
Citation analysis
Nicolaisen, J. (2007) · Annual Review of Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/aris.2007.1440410120 · Cited by 295 · see citing works
The place of serials in referencing practices: Comparing natural sciences and engineering with social sciences and humanities
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
The weakening relationship between the impact factor and papers' citations in the digital age
Lozano, G. A., Larivière, V., & Gingras, Y. (2012) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.22731 · Cited by 293 · see citing works
Production and Citation Measures in the Sociology of Science: The Problem of Multiple Authorship
Lindsey, D. (1980) · Social Studies of Science · doi:10.1177/030631278001000202 · Cited by 285 · see citing works
Lifting the crown—citation z-score
Lundberg, J. (2007) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2006.09.007 · Cited by 284 · see citing works
Scientometric datafiles. A comprehensive set of indicators on 2649 journals and 96 countries in all major science fields and subfields 1981–1985
Schubert, A. P., Glänzel, W., & Braun, T. (1989) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/bf02093234 · Cited by 274 · see citing works
A Google Scholar h‐index for journals: An alternative metric to measure journal impact in economics and business
Harzing, A.-W. K., & van der Wal, R. (2008) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.20953 · Cited by 274 · see citing works
The <scp>G</scp> oogle scholar experiment: How to index false papers and manipulate bibliometric indicators
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
The expansion of Google Scholar versus Web of Science: a longitudinal study
de Winter, J., ZADPOOR, A. A., & Dodou, D. (2013) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-013-1089-2 · Cited by 270 · see citing works
Does self-citation pay?
Fowler, J. H., & Aksnes, D. W. (2007) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-007-1777-2 · Cited by 259 · see citing works
Measuring academic influence: Not all citations are equal
Zhu, X., Turney, P. D., Lemire, D., & Vellino, A. (2014) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.23179 · Cited by 256 · see citing works
The Hirsch index and related impact measures
Egghe, L. (2010) · Annual Review of Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/aris.2010.1440440109 · Cited by 252 · see citing works
Benchmarking international scientific excellence: Are highly cited research papers an appropriate frame of reference?
Tijssen, R., Visser, M. S., & van Leeuwen, T. N. (2002) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1023/a:1016082432660 · Cited by 243 · see citing works
Assessment of research fields in Scopus and Web of Science in the view of national research evaluation in Slovenia
Bartol, T., Budimir, G., Smrekar, D. D., Pušnik, M., & Južnič, P. (2013) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-013-1148-8 · Cited by 242 · see citing works
Citation Analysis May Severely Underestimate the Impact of Clinical Research as Compared to Basic Research
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
Self-citation
A comparison of bibliometric indicators for computer science scholars and journals on Web of Science and Google Scholar
Franceschet, M. (2009) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-009-0021-2 · Cited by 236 · see citing works
Towards a new crown indicator: an empirical analysis
Waltman, L., van Eck, N. J., van Leeuwen, T. N., Visser, M. S., & van Raan, A. F. J. (2011) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0354-5 · Cited by 234 · see citing works
Self-citation
A modification of the h-index: The hm-index accounts for multi-authored manuscripts
Schreiber, M. (2008) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2008.05.001 · Cited by 233 · see citing works
A bibliometric study on ageing and reception processes of scientific literature
Glänzel, W., & Schoepflin, U. (1995) · Journal of Information Science · doi:10.1177/016555159502100104 · Cited by 232 · see citing works
Impact factors can mislead
Moed, H., & van Leeuwen, T. V. (1996) · Nature · doi:10.1038/381186a0 · Cited by 232 · see citing works
Scaling the h-index for different scientific ISI fields
Iglesias, J. E., & Pecharromán, C. (2007) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-007-1805-x · Cited by 232 · see citing works
Changing publication patterns in the Social Sciences and Humanities, 2000–2009
Engels, T., Ossenblok, T. L. B., & Spruyt, E. H. J. (2012) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0680-2 · Cited by 225 · see citing works
Improving the accuracy of institute for scientific information's journal impact factors
Moed, H. F., & van Leeuwen, T. N. (1995) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-4571(199507)46:6 · Cited by 223 · see citing works
A preliminary test of Google Scholar as a source for citation data: a longitudinal study of Nobel prize winners
Harzing, A.-W. K. (2012) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0777-7 · Cited by 222 · see citing works
A review of the characteristics of 108 author-level bibliometric indicators
Wildgaard, L., Schneider, J. W., & Larsen, B. (2014) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-014-1423-3 · Cited by 220 · see citing works
The research guarantors of scientific papers and the output counting: a promising new approach
Anegón, F. D. M., Guerrero‐Bote, V. P., Bornmann, L., & Moed, H. F. (2013) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-013-1046-0 · Cited by 212 · see citing works
The Holy Grail of science policy: Exploring and combining bibliometric tools in search of scientific excellence
van Leeuwen, T. N., Visser, M. S., Moed, H. F., Nederhof, T. J., & van Raan, A. F. J. (2003) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1023/a:1024141819302 · Cited by 207 · see citing works
Coverage and citation impact of oncological journals in the Web of Science and Scopus
López-Illescas, C., Anegón, F. D. M., & Moed, H. F. (2008) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2008.08.001 · Cited by 201 · see citing works
Counting the citations: a comparison of Web of Science and Google Scholar in the field of business and management
Mingers, J., & Lipitakis, E. (2010) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-010-0270-0 · Cited by 198 · see citing works
The Evaluation of Research by Scientometric Indicators
Vinkler, P. (2010) · Chandos Publishing eBooks · doi:10.1533/9781780630250 · Cited by 195 · see citing works
Users, narcissism and control – tracking the impact of scholarly publications in the 21st century
Costas, R., & Wouters, P. F. (2012) · Cited by 195 · see citing works
A concise review on the role of author self-citations in information science, bibliometrics and science policy
Glänzel, W., Debackere, K., Thijs, B., & Schubert, A. P. (2006) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0098-9 · Cited by 194 · see citing works
Collective credit allocation in science
Shen, H., & Barabási, A.-Ĺ. (2014) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1401992111 · Cited by 193 · see citing works
Characteristics of research output in social sciences and humanities: From a research evaluation perspective
Huang, M., & Chang, Y. (2008) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.20885 · Cited by 193 · see citing works
How are new citation‐based journal indicators adding to the bibliometric toolbox?
Loet Leydesdorff, A. (2009) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.21024 · Cited by 191 · see citing works
Some 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
Self-citation
An empirical analysis of the use of alphabetical authorship in scientific publishing
Waltman, L. (2012) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2012.07.008 · Cited by 186 · see citing works
Self-citation
Better late than never? On the chance to become highly cited only beyond the standard bibliometric time horizon
Glänzel, W., Schlemmer, B., & Thijs, B. (2003) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1023/b:scie.0000006881.30700.ea · Cited by 184 · see citing works
Modifying 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 · see citing works
Relativity of citation performance and excellence measures: From cross-field to cross-scale effects of field-normalisation
Zitt, M., Ramanana-Rahary, S., & Bassecoulard, E. (2005) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-005-0218-y · Cited by 182 · see citing works
The h-index and self-citations
Engqvist, L., & Frommen, J. G. (2008) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2008.01.009 · Cited by 179 · see citing works
Self-citation corrections for the Hirsch index
Schreiber, M. (2007) · Europhysics Letters (EPL) · doi:10.1209/0295-5075/78/30002 · Cited by 175 · see citing works
Harmonic Allocation of Authorship Credit: Source-Level Correction of Bibliometric Bias Assures Accurate Publication and Citation Analysis
Hagen, N. T. (2008) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0004021 · Cited by 173 · see citing works
Caveats for the journal and field normalizations in the CWTS (“Leiden”) evaluations of research performance
Tobias Opthof, A., & Loet Leydesdorff, A. (2010) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2010.02.003 · Cited by 173 · 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
The Eigenfactor MetricsTM: A Network Approach to Assessing Scholarly Journals
West, J. D., Bergstrom, T. C., & Bergstrom, C. T. (2010) · College & Research Libraries · doi:10.5860/0710236 · Cited by 169 · see citing works
Sources of Google Scholar citations outside the Science Citation Index: A comparison between four science disciplines
Kousha, K., & Thelwall, M. A. (2007) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-008-0217-x · Cited by 169 · see citing works
The new Excellence Indicator in the World Report of the SCImago Institutions Rankings 2011
Bornmann, L., Anegón, F. D. M., & Loet Leydesdorff, A. (2012) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2011.11.006 · Cited by 165 · see citing works
Integrated impact indicators compared with impact factors: An alternative research design with policy implications
Loet 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
Conference proceedings as a source of scientific information: A bibliometric analysis
Lisée, C., Larivière, V., & Archambault, É. (2008) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.20888 · Cited by 164 · see citing works
Early citation counts correlate with accumulated impact
Adams, J. R. (2005) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-005-0228-9 · Cited by 163 · see citing works
Scopus’s Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) versus a Journal Impact Factor Based on Fractional Counting of Citations
Leydesdorff, L., & Opthof, T. (2010) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.21371 · Cited by 160 · see citing works
Journal Evaluation: Technical and Practical Issues
Rousseau, R. (2002) · Illinois Digital Environment for Access to Learning and Scholarship (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) · Cited by 158 · see citing works
Google Scholar coverage of a multidisciplinary field
Walters, W. H. (2006) · Information Processing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2006.08.006 · Cited by 157 · see citing works
Deflated, inflated and phantom citation counts
Jacso, P. (2006) · Online Information Review · doi:10.1108/14684520610675816 · Cited by 156 · see citing works
Source Normalized Indicators of Citation Impact: An Overview of Different Approaches and an Empirical Comparison
Waltman, L., & van Eck, N. J. (2013) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0913-4 · Cited by 155 · see citing works
Self-citation
Further steps towards an ideal method of measuring citation performance: The avoidance of citation (ratio) averages in field-normalization
Bornmann, L., & Mutz, R. (2010) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2010.10.009 · Cited by 154 · see citing works
To share the fame in a fair way, h m modifies h for multi-authored manuscripts
Schreiber, M. (2008) · New Journal of Physics · doi:10.1088/1367-2630/10/4/040201 · Cited by 154 · see citing works
A Systematic Analysis of Duplicate Records in Scopus
Valderrama-Zurián, J.-C., Aguilar-Moya, R., Melero-Fuentes, D., & Aleixandre-Benavent, R. (2015) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2015.05.002 · Cited by 154 · see citing works
A 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
Self-citation
The skewness of science in 219 sub-fields and a number of aggregates
Albarrán, P., Crespo, J. A., Ortuño-Ortı́n, I., & Ruiz‐Castillo, J. (2011) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0407-9 · Cited by 151 · see citing works
Cross-field normalization of scientometric indicators
Schubert, A. P., & Braun, T. (1996) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/bf02129597 · Cited by 150 · see citing works
Articles vs. proceedings papers: Do they differ in research relevance and impact? A case study in the Library and Information Science field
González‐Albo, B., & Bordons, M. (2011) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2011.01.011 · Cited by 150 · see citing works
Self-citations at the meso and individual levels: Effects of different calculation methods
Costas, R., van Leeuwen, T. N., & Bordons, M. (2010) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-010-0187-7 · Cited by 148 · see citing works
Methods for estimating the size of Google Scholar
Orduña‐Malea, E., Ayllón, J. M., Martín‐Martín, A., & López‐Cózar, E. D. (2015) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1614-6 · Cited by 147 · 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
Measuring China"s research performance using the Science Citation Index
Moed, H. F. (2002) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1023/a:1014812810602 · Cited by 144 · see citing works
Metadata mega mess in Google Scholar
Jacsó, P. (2010) · Online Information Review · doi:10.1108/14684521011024191 · Cited by 143 · see citing works
A 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
A bibliometric approach to the role of author self-citations in scientific communication
Glänzel, W., Thijs, B., & Schlemmer, B. (2004) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1023/b:scie.0000013299.38210.74 · Cited by 138 · see citing works
The distribution of references across texts: Some implications for citation analysis
Ding, Y., Liu, X., Guo, C., & Cronin, B. (2013) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2013.03.003 · Cited by 137 · see citing works
Mathematical theory of the h‐ and g‐index in case of fractional counting of authorship
Egghe, L. (2008) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.20845 · Cited by 137 · see citing works
The representation of the social sciences and humanities in the Web of Science--a comparison of publication patterns and incentive structures in Flanders and Norway (2005-9)
Ossenblok, T. L. B., Engels, T., & Sivertsen, G. (2012) · Research Evaluation · doi:10.1093/reseval/rvs019 · Cited by 134 · see citing works
Assessing scientific research performance and impact with single indices
Panaretos, J., & Malesios, C. (2009) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-008-2174-9 · Cited by 132 · see citing works
On the calculation of percentile‐based bibliometric indicators
Waltman, L., & Schreiber, M. (2012) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.22775 · Cited by 130 · see citing works
Self-citation
The operationalization of “fields” as <scp>WoS</scp> subject categories ( <scp>WC</scp> s) in evaluative bibliometrics: The cases of “library and information science” and “science & technology studies”
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
Determining scientific impact using a collaboration index
Stallings, J. D., Vance, E. A., Yang, J., Vannier, M. W., Liang, J., Pang, L., Dai, L. Y., Ye, I. B., & Wang, G. (2013) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1220184110 · Cited by 127 · see citing works
Conferences versus journals in computer science
Vrettas, G., & Sanderson, M. (2015) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.23349 · Cited by 127 · see citing works
On the calculation of percentile-based bibliometric indicators
Waltman, L. R., & Schreiber, M. (2012) · Leiden Repository (Leiden University) · Cited by 126 · see citing works
Self-citation
Ranking national research systems by citation indicators. A comparative analysis using whole and fractionalised counting methods
Aksnes, D. W., Schneider, J. W., & Gunnarsson, M. (2011) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2011.08.002 · Cited by 125 · see citing works
Harmonic publication and citation counting: sharing authorship credit equitably – not equally, geometrically or arithmetically
Hagen, N. T. (2009) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-009-0129-4 · Cited by 125 · see citing works
How are excellent (highly cited) papers defined in bibliometrics? A quantitative analysis of the literature
Bornmann, L. (2014) · Research Evaluation · doi:10.1093/reseval/rvu002 · Cited by 124 · see citing works
Rank‐normalized impact factor: A way to compare journal performance across subject categories
Pudovkin, A. I., & Garfield, E. (2004) · Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/meet.1450410159 · Cited by 123 · see citing works
How fractional counting of citations affects the impact factor: Normalization in terms of differences in citation potentials among fields of science
Loet Leydesdorff, A., & Bornmann, L. (2010) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.21450 · Cited by 123 · see citing works
The effect of highly cited papers on national citation indicators
Aksnes, D. W., & Sivertsen, G. (2004) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1023/b:scie.0000018529.58334.eb · Cited by 122 · see citing works
The museum of errors/horrors in Scopus
Franceschini, F., Maisano, D. A., & Mastrogiacomo, L. (2016) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2015.11.006 · Cited by 121 · see citing works
Field-normalized citation impact indicators using algorithmically constructed classification systems of science
Ruiz‐Castillo, J., & Waltman, L. (2014) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2014.11.010 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
Self-citation
Comprehensive bibliographic coverage of the social sciences and humanities in a citation index: an empirical analysis of the potential
Sivertsen, G., & Larsen, B. (2012) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0615-3 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
The h‐index: a broad review of a new bibliometric indicator
Norris, M. W., & Oppenheim, C. (2010) · Journal of Documentation · doi:10.1108/00220411011066790 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
What is the best database for computer science journal articles?
Cavacini, A. (2014) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-014-1506-1 · Cited by 112 · see citing works
Assessing the varying level of impact measurement accuracy as a function of the citation window length
Abramo, G., Cicero, T., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2011) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2011.06.004 · Cited by 108 · see citing works
Rivals for the crown: Reply to Opthof and Leydesdorff
van Raan, A. F. J., van Leeuwen, T. N., Visser, M. S., van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2010.03.008 · Cited by 108 · see citing works
Self-citation
Eminence of scientists in the light of the h -index and other scientometric indicators
Vinkler, P. (2007) · Journal of Information Science · doi:10.1177/0165551506072165 · Cited by 108 · see citing works
Severe language effect in university rankings: particularly Germany and France are wronged in citation-based rankings
van Raan, A. F. J., van Leeuwen, T. N., & Visser, M. S. (2011) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0382-1 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
Eigenfactor: Does the principle of repeated improvement result in better estimates than raw citation counts?
Davis, P. M. (2008) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.20943 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
A new classification system to describe the ageing of scientific journals and their impact factors
Moed, H. F., van Leeuwen, T. N., & Reedijk, J. (1998) · Journal of Documentation · doi:10.1108/eum0000000007175 · Cited by 104 · see citing works
What is in a name? Credit assignment practices in different disciplines
Frandsen, T. F., & Nicolaisen, J. (2010) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2010.06.010 · Cited by 103 · see citing works
Accuracy and completeness of publication and citation records in the Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar: A case study for the computation of <i>h</i> indices in Psychology
García‐Pérez, M. A. (2010) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.21372 · Cited by 101 · see citing works
An item-by-item subject classification of papers published in multidisciplinary and general journals using reference analysis
Glänzel, W., Schubert, A. P., & Czerwon, H. J. (1999) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/bf02458488 · Cited by 101 · see citing works
Counting methods are decisive for rankings based on publication and citation studies
Gauffriau, M., & Larsen, P. O. (2005) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-005-0239-6 · Cited by 101 · see citing works
An exploratory study of Google Scholar
Mayr, P., & Walter, A. (2007) · Online Information Review · doi:10.1108/14684520710841784 · Cited by 101 · see citing works
Comparisons of results of publication counting using different methods
Gauffriau, M., Larsen, P. O., Maye, I., Roulin-Perriard, A., & von Ins, M. (2008) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-007-1934-2 · Cited by 101 · see citing works
Subfield-specific normalized relative indicators and a new generation of relational charts: Methodological foundations illustrated on the assessment of institutional research performance
Glänzel, W., Thijs, B., Schubert, A. P., & Debackere, K. (2008) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-008-2109-5 · Cited by 100 · see citing works
Proceedings of the 17th International conference on science and technology indicators
Larivière, V. (2012) · Cited by 100 · see citing works
Characteristic scores and scales in assessing citation impact
Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. P. (1988) · Journal of Information Science · doi:10.1177/016555158801400208 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
Counting citations in the field of business and management: why use Google Scholar rather than the Web of Science
Amara, N., & Landry, R. (2012) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0729-2 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
Convergent validity of bibliometric Google Scholar data in the field of chemistry—Citation counts for papers that were accepted by Angewandte Chemie International Edition or rejected but published elsewhere, using Google Scholar, Science Citation Index, Scopus, and Chemical Abstracts
Bornmann, L., Marx, W., Schier, H., Rahm, E., Thor, A., & Daniel, H. (2008) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2008.11.001 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
The influence of author self-citations on bibliometric macro indicators
Glänzel, W., & Thijs, B. (2004) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1023/b:scie.0000018535.99885.e9 · Cited by 98 · see citing works
Universality of scholarly impact metricsPreprint
Kaur, J., Radicchi, F., & Menczer, F. (2013) · Cited by 97 · see citing works
Publication, cooperation and productivity measures in scientific research
Gauffriau, M., Larsen, P. O., Maye, I., Roulin-Perriard, A., & von Ins, M. (2007) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-007-1800-2 · Cited by 95 · see citing works
Towards appropriate indicators of journal impact
Moed, H. F., van Leeuwen, T. N., & Reedijk, J. (1999) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/bf02459613 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
Availability of digital object identifiers (DOIs) in web of science and scopus
Gorraiz, J., Melero-Fuentes, D., Gumpenberger, C., & Valderrama-Zurián, J.-C. (2016) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2015.11.008 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Rescaling citations of publications in physics
Radicchi, F., & Castellano, C. (2011) · Physical Review E · doi:10.1103/physreve.83.046116 · Cited by 92 · see citing works
The invariant distribution of references in scientific articles
Bertin, M., Atanassova, I., Gingras, Y., & Larivière, V. (2016) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.23367 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
Universality of scholarly impact metrics
Kaur, J., Radicchi, F., & Menczer, F. (2013) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2013.09.002 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
Opportunities for and limitations of the B ook C itation I ndex
Gorraiz, J. I., Purnell, P. J., & Glänzel, W. (2013) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.22875 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
A modified method for calculating the Impact Factors of journals in ISI Journal Citation Reports: Polymer Science Category in 1997–2001
Sombatsompop, N., Markpin, T., & Premkamolnetr, N. (2004) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1023/b:scie.0000027794.98854.f6 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
A combined bibliometric indicator to predict article impact
Levitt, J. M., & Thelwall, M. A. (2010) · Information Processing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2010.09.005 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
A Reverse Engineering Approach to the Suppression of Citation Biases Reveals Universal Properties of Citation Distributions
Radicchi, F., & Castellano, C. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0033833 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
Development and application of journal impact measures in the Dutch science system
van Leeuwen, T. N., & Moed, H. F. (2002) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1023/a:1014808709694 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
A bibliometric approach to the role of author self-citations in scientific communication
Glänzel, W., Thijs, B., & Schlemmer, B. (2003) · Lirias · Cited by 85 · see citing works
The importance of accounting for the number of co-authors and their order when assessing research performance at the individual level in the life sciences
Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Rosati, F. (2012) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2012.11.003 · Cited by 85 · see citing works
The growth of science and database coverage
Michels, C., & Schmoch, U. (2012) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0732-7 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
The difference between popularity and prestige in the sciences and in the social sciences: A bibliometric analysis
Franceschet, M. (2009) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2009.08.001 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Ike Antkare one of the great stars in the scientific firmament
Antkare, I. (2010) · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Proceedings literature as additional data source for bibliometric analysis
Glänzel, W., Schlemmer, B., Schubert, A. P., & Thijs, B. (2006) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0124-y · Cited by 83 · see citing works
A comparison of 17 author-level bibliometric indicators for researchers in Astronomy, Environmental Science, Philosophy and Public Health in Web of Science and Google Scholar
Wildgaard, L. (2015) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1608-4 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
Comparing Google Scholar and ISI Web of Science for Earth Sciences
Mikki, S. (2009) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-009-0038-6 · Cited by 80 · see citing works

Flagged first, then by citations

18 of the 377 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Sorted by citations

bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis
Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007 · Cited by 16,064 · see citing works
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
Science Mapping: A Systematic Review of the Literature
Chen, C. (2017) · Journal of Data and Information Science · doi:10.1515/jdis-2017-0006 · Cited by 2,056 · see citing works
Science of science
Fortunato, S., Bergstrom, C. T., Börner, K., Evans, J. A., Helbing, D., Milojević, S., Petersen, A. M., Radicchi, F., Sinatra, R., Uzzi, B., et al. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aao0185 · Cited by 1,497 · see citing works
Self-citation
Constructing bibliometric networks: A comparison between full and fractional counting
Perianes-Rodriguez, A., Waltman, L., & van Eck, N. J. (2016) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2016.10.006 · Cited by 1,416 · see citing works
Self-citation
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
Papers and patents are becoming less disruptive over time
Park, M., Leahey, E., & Funk, R. J. (2023) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05543-x · Cited by 899 · see citing works
Designing business models in circular economy: A systematic literature review and research agenda
Centobelli, P., Cerchione, R., Chiaroni, D., Del Vecchio, P., & Urbinati, A. (2020) · Business Strategy and the Environment · doi:10.1002/bse.2466 · Cited by 672 · see citing works
Evaluation Practices and Effects of Indicator Use—A Literature Review
Rijcke, S. D., Wouters, P. F., Rushforth, A. D., Franssen, T. P., & Hammarfelt, B. (2016) · Research Evaluation · doi:10.1093/reseval/rvv038 · Cited by 467 · see citing works
Large-Scale Analysis of the Accuracy of the Journal Classification Systems of Web of Science and Scopus
Wang, Q., & Waltman, L. (2016) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2016.02.003 · Cited by 417 · see citing works
Self-citation
The science of science: From the perspective of complex systems
Zeng, A., Shen, Z., Zhou, J., Wu, J., Fan, Y., Wang, Y., & Stanley, E. (2017) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2017.10.001 · Cited by 406 · see citing works
A bibliometric analysis of creativity in the field of business economics
Castillo‐Vergara, M., Álvarez‐Marín, A., & Placencio-Hidalgo, D. (2017) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.12.011 · Cited by 350 · see citing works
Sustainable development, intellectual capital and technology policies: A structured literature review and future research agenda
Secundo, G., Ndou, V., Vecchio, P. D., & Pascale, G. D. (2020) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2020.119917 · Cited by 350 · see citing works
The strain on scientific publishing
Hanson, M. A., Barreiro, P. G., Crosetto, P., & Brockington, D. (2024) · Quantitative Science Studies · doi:10.1162/qss_a_00327 · Cited by 345 · see citing works
Intersectional inequalities in science
Kozlowski, D., Larivière, V., Sugimoto, C. R., & Monroe‐White, T. (2022) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2113067119 · Cited by 342 · see citing works
Dimensions: 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
Mastering the digital transformation through organizational capabilities: A conceptual framework
Konopik, J., Jahn, C., Schuster, T., Hoßbach, N., & Pflaum, A. (2021) · Digital Business · doi:10.1016/j.digbus.2021.100019 · Cited by 309 · see citing works
Industry 4.0: A bibliometric review of its managerial intellectual structure and potential evolution in the service industries
Mariani, M. M., & Borghi, M. (2019) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119752 · Cited by 305 · see citing works
Field-normalized citation impact indicators and the choice of an appropriate counting method
Waltman, L., & van Eck, N. J. (2015) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2015.08.001 · Cited by 297 · see citing works
Self-citation
Dimensions: A competitor to Scopus and the Web of Science?
Thelwall, M. (2018) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2018.03.006 · Cited by 294 · see citing works
Big data and analytics in hospitality and tourism: a systematic literature review
Mariani, M. M., & Baggio, R. (2021) · International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management · doi:10.1108/ijchm-03-2021-0301 · Cited by 289 · see citing works
Revisiting the idea of knowledge-based dynamic capabilities for digital transformation
Mele, G., Capaldo, G., Secundo, G., & Corvello, V. (2023) · Journal of Knowledge Management · doi:10.1108/jkm-02-2023-0121 · Cited by 267 · see citing works
Research Weaving: Visualizing the Future of Research Synthesis
Nakagawa, S., Samarasinghe, G., Haddaway, N., Westgate, M. J., O’Dea, R. E., Noble, D. W. A., & Lagisz, M. (2018) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2018.11.007 · Cited by 260 · see citing works
Ranking in evolving complex networks
Liao, H., Mariani, M. S., Medo, M., Zhang, Y., & Zhou, M.-Y. (2017) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2017.05.001 · Cited by 234 · see citing works
Sample size in bibliometric analysis
Rogers, G., Szomszor, M., & Adams, J. R. (2020) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-020-03647-7 · Cited by 227 · see citing works
The digital transformation of corporate reporting – a systematic literature review and avenues for future research
Lombardi, R., & Secundo, G. (2020) · Meditari Accountancy Research · doi:10.1108/medar-04-2020-0870 · Cited by 221 · see citing works
The h-index is no longer an effective correlate of scientific reputation
Koltun, V., & Hafner, D. (2021) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0253397 · Cited by 213 · see citing works
Digital Academic Entrepreneurship: A structured literature review and avenue for a research agenda
Secundo, G., Rippa, P., & Cerchione, R. (2020) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120118 · Cited by 210 · see citing works
A theoretical model of the relationship between the h-index and other simple citation indicators
Barsotti, L. B., & Lando, T. (2017) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2351-9 · Cited by 206 · see citing works
Self-citations as strategic response to the use of metrics for career decisions
Seeber, M., Cattaneo, M., Meoli, M., & Malighetti, P. (2017) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2017.12.004 · Cited by 205 · see citing works
Measuring scientific impact beyond academia: An assessment of existing impact metrics and proposed improvements
Ravenscroft, J., Liakata, M., Clare, A., & Duma, D. (2017) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0173152 · Cited by 202 · see citing works
The Changing Landscape of Neuroscience Research, 2006–2015: A Bibliometric Study
Yeung, A. W. K., Goto, T. K., & Leung, W. K. (2017) · Frontiers in Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnins.2017.00120 · Cited by 201 · see citing works
Digital transformation: A meta-review and guidelines for future research
dos Reis, J. C. G., & Melão, N. F. (2023) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e12834 · Cited by 201 · see citing works
Interpreting Bibliometric Data
Szomszor, M., Adams, J. R., Fry, R., Gebert, C., Pendlebury, D., Potter, R. W. K., & Rogers, G. (2021) · Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics · doi:10.3389/frma.2020.628703 · Cited by 192 · see citing works
Evaluating Journal Quality: A Review of Journal Citation Indicators and Ranking in Business and Management
Mingers, J., & Yang, L. (2017) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2016.07.058 · Cited by 184 · see citing works
Professional and Citizen Bibliometrics: Complementarities and Ambivalences in the Development and Use of Indicators—a State-of-the-Art Report
Leydesdorff, L., Wouters, P., & Bornmann, L. (2016) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-016-2150-8 · Cited by 173 · see citing works
Increasing trend of scientists to switch between topics
Zeng, A., Shen, Z., Zhou, J., Fan, Y., Di, Z., Wang, Y., Stanley, H. E., & Havlin, S. (2019) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-019-11401-8 · Cited by 169 · see citing works
Measuring Science: Basic Principles and Application of Advanced Bibliometrics
van Raan, A. F. J. (2019) · Springer handbooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-02511-3_10 · Cited by 166 · see citing works
The Digital Agricultural Revolution: A Bibliometric Analysis Literature Review
Bertoglio, R., Corbo, C., Renga, F. M., & Matteucci, M. (2021) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3115258 · Cited by 166 · see citing works
Sustainable biofuel economy: A mapping through bibliometric research
Hasan, M., Abedin, M. Z., Amin, M. B., Nekmahmud, M., & Oláh, J. (2023) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.117644 · Cited by 163 · see citing works
What drives global science? The four competing narratives
Marginson, S. (2021) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2021.1942822 · Cited by 156 · see citing works
Artificial intelligence adoption in the physical sciences, natural sciences, life sciences, social sciences and the arts and humanities: A bibliometric analysis of research publications from 1960-2021
Hajkowicz, S. A., Sanderson, C., Karimi, S., Bratanova, A., & Naughtin, C. K. (2023) · Technology in Society · doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2023.102260 · Cited by 155 · see citing works
Overcitation and overrepresentation of review papers in the most cited papers
Miranda, R., & García-Carpintero, E. (2018) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2018.08.006 · Cited by 153 · see citing works
What is global higher education?
Marginson, S. (2022) · Oxford Review of Education · doi:10.1080/03054985.2022.2061438 · Cited by 145 · see citing works
Technological innovation-enabling industry 4.0 paradigm: A systematic literature review
Cannavacciuolo, L., Ferraro, G., Ponsiglione, C., Primario, S., & Quinto, I. (2023) · Technovation · doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2023.102733 · Cited by 144 · see citing works
Determinants of citation impact: A comparative analysis of the Global South versus the Global North
Confraria, H., Godinho, M. M., & Wang, L. (2016) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2016.11.004 · Cited by 142 · see citing works
Which early works are cited most frequently in climate change research literature? A bibliometric approach based on Reference Publication Year SpectroscopyPreprint
Marx, W., Haunschild, R., Thor, A., & Bornmann, L. (2016) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.1007/s11192-016-2115-y · Cited by 140 · see citing works
An automatic literature knowledge graph and reasoning network modeling framework based on ontology and natural language processing
Chen, H., & Luo, X. (2019) · Advanced Engineering Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.aei.2019.100959 · Cited by 133 · see citing works
Intellectual synthesis in mentorship determines success in academic careers
Liénard, J., Achakulvisut, T., Acuna, D. E., & David, S. V. (2018) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-018-07034-y · Cited by 131 · see citing works
Hegemony and Inequality in Global Science: Problems of the Center-Periphery Model
Marginson, S., & Xu, X. (2022) · Comparative Education Review · doi:10.1086/722760 · Cited by 131 · see citing works
Data, measurement and empirical methods in the science of science
Liu, L., Jones, B. F., Uzzi, B., & Wang, D. (2023) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-023-01562-4 · Cited by 129 · see citing works
Research portfolio analysis and topic prominence
Klavans, R., & Boyack, K. W. (2017) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2017.10.002 · Cited by 127 · see citing works
‘All things are in flux’: China in global science
Marginson, S. (2021) · Higher Education · doi:10.1007/s10734-021-00712-9 · Cited by 125 · see citing works
How much is too much? The difference between research influence and self-citation excess
Szomszor, M., Pendlebury, D., & Adams, J. R. (2020) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-020-03417-5 · Cited by 124 · see citing works
Social media for entrepreneurship: myth or reality? A structured literature review and a future research agenda
Secundo, G., Vecchio, P. D., & Mele, G. (2020) · International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research · doi:10.1108/ijebr-07-2020-0453 · Cited by 123 · see citing works
The Coverage of Microsoft Academic: Analyzing the Publication Output of a University
Hug, S. E., & Brändle, M. P. (2017) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2535-3 · Cited by 120 · see citing works
Global science and national comparisons: beyond bibliometrics and scientometrics
Marginson, S. (2021) · Comparative Education · doi:10.1080/03050068.2021.1981725 · Cited by 120 · see citing works
Overton: A bibliometric database of policy document citations
Szomszor, M., & Adie, E. A. (2022) · Quantitative Science Studies · doi:10.1162/qss_a_00204 · Cited by 120 · see citing works
Unfolding the innovation system for the development of countries: coevolution of Science, Technology and Production
Pugliese, E., Cimini, G., Patelli, A., Zaccaria, A., Pietronero, L., & Gabrielli, A. (2019) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-019-52767-5 · Cited by 118 · see citing works
Patterns of authors contribution in scientific manuscripts
Corrêa, E. A., Jr., Silva, F. N., Costa, L. D. F., & Amancio, D. R. (2017) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2017.03.003 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods to Address Water Allocation Problems: A Systematic Review
Gebre, S. L., Cattrysse, D., & Orshoven, J. V. (2021) · Water · doi:10.3390/w13020125 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
A bibliometric analysis of creative industries: Current trends and future directions
Dharmani, P., Das, S., & Prashar, S. (2021) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.06.037 · Cited by 111 · see citing works
Managing customer knowledge through the use of big data analytics in tourism research
Centobelli, P., & Ndou, V. (2019) · Current Issues in Tourism · doi:10.1080/13683500.2018.1564739 · Cited by 110 · see citing works
Multi-criteria decision making methods to address rural land allocation problems: A systematic review
Gebre, S. L., Cattrysse, D., Alemayehu, E., & Orshoven, J. V. (2021) · International Soil and Water Conservation Research · doi:10.1016/j.iswcr.2021.04.005 · Cited by 109 · see citing works
How to avoid borrowed plumes in academia
Osterloh, M., & Frey, B. S. (2019) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2019.103831 · Cited by 108 · see citing works
Board gender diversity and firm performance: evidence from Latin America
Marquez-Cardenas, V., González-Ruíz, J. D., & Grisales, E. A. D. (2022) · Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment · doi:10.1080/20430795.2021.2017256 · Cited by 108 · see citing works
Publication trends and knowledge mapping in 3D printing in orthopaedics
Vaishya, R., Patralekh, M. K., Vaish, A., Agarwal, A. K., & Vijay, V. (2018) · Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma · doi:10.1016/j.jcot.2018.07.006 · Cited by 106 · see citing works
Why do papers from international collaborations get more citations? A bibliometric analysis of Library and Information Science papers
Vélez-Estévez, A., García‐Sánchez, P., Moral-Muñoz, J. A., & Cobo, M. J. (2022) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-022-04486-4 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
Management of Green Intellectual Capital: Evidence-Based Literature Review and Future Directions
Benevene, P., Buonomo, I., Kong, E., Pansini, M., & Farnese, M. L. (2021) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su13158349 · Cited by 104 · see citing works
Field Normalization of Scientometric Indicators
Waltman, L., & van Eck, N. J. (2019) · Springer handbooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-02511-3_11 · Cited by 103 · see citing works
Self-citation
Relationship between the Cost of Capital and Environmental, Social, and Governance Scores: Evidence from Latin America
Ramirez, A. G., Monsalve, J. C., González-Ruíz, J. D., Almonacid, P. M., & Alejandro Peña, P. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su14095012 · Cited by 102 · see citing works
Sustainable Financial Products in the Latin America Banking Industry: Current Status and Insights
Mejia-Escobar, J. C., González-Ruiz, J. D., & Duque-Grisales, E. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12145648 · Cited by 98 · see citing works
Use of the journal impact factor for assessing individual articles need not be statistically wrong
Waltman, L., & Traag, V. (2020) · F1000Research · doi:10.12688/f1000research.23418.1 · Cited by 97 · see citing works
Self-citation
International collaboration in Brazilian science: financing and impact
Mcmanus, C. M., Neves, A. A. B., Maranhão, A. Q., Filho, A. G. S., & Santana, J. M. (2020) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-020-03728-7 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
COVID-19 and finance scholarship: A systematic and bibliometric analysis
Boubaker, S., Goodell, J. W., Kumar, S., & Sureka, R. (2022) · International Review of Financial Analysis · doi:10.1016/j.irfa.2022.102458 · Cited by 92 · see citing works
Fault diagnosis of photovoltaic systems using artificial intelligence: A bibliometric approach
Sepúlveda-Oviedo, E. H., Travé-Massuyès, L., Subias, A., Pavlov, M., & Alonso, C. (2023) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e21491 · Cited by 92 · see citing works
Methods to account for citation inflation in research evaluation
Petersen, A. M., Pan, R. K., Fabio Pammolli, A., & Fortunato, S. (2019) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2019.04.009 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
Current status and research trends of lithium disilicate in dentistry: A bibliometric analysis
Chen, Y., Yeung, A. W. K., Pow, E., & Tsoi, J. K. H. (2020) · Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry · doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.08.012 · Cited by 89 · see citing works
Measuring scientific contributions with modified fractional counting
Sivertsen, G., Rousseau, R., & Zhang, L. (2019) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2019.03.010 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
An analysis of the intellectual structure of research on the financial economics of precious metals
Corbet, S., Dowling, M., Gao, X., Huang, S., Lucey, B. M., & Vigne, S. A. (2019) · Resources Policy · doi:10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.101416 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
Regional resilience: a stretched concept?
Fröhlich, K., & Hassink, R. (2018) · European Planning Studies · doi:10.1080/09654313.2018.1494137 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
Investigating sustainable consumption behaviors: a bibliometric analysis
Vergura, D. T., Zerbini, C., Luceri, B., & Palladino, R. (2023) · British Food Journal · doi:10.1108/bfj-06-2022-0491 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
Consistency and validity of interdisciplinarity measures
Wang, Q., & Schneider, J. W. (2019) · Quantitative Science Studies · doi:10.1162/qss_a_00011 · Cited by 85 · see citing works
The APC-barrier and its effect on stratification in open access publishing
Klebel, T., & Ross‐Hellauer, T. (2023) · Quantitative Science Studies · doi:10.1162/qss_a_00245 · Cited by 85 · see citing works
A systematic review on the factors governing precision agriculture adoption among small-scale farmers
John, D., Hussin, N., Shahibi, M. S., Ahmad, M., Hashim, H., & Ametefe, D. S. (2023) · Outlook on Agriculture · doi:10.1177/00307270231205640 · Cited by 85 · see citing works
A Systematic Mapping Study on Customer Loyalty and Brand Management
Tartaglione, A. M., Cavacece, Y., Russo, G. M., & Granata, G. (2019) · Administrative Sciences · doi:10.3390/admsci9010008 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
And the credit goes to … - Ghost and honorary authorship among social scientists
Pruschak, G., & Hopp, C. (2022) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0267312 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
Science deserves to be judged by its contents, not by its wrapping: Revisiting Seglen's work on journal impact and research evaluation
Zhang, L., Rousseau, R., & Sivertsen, G. (2017) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0174205 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Knowledge management within a strategic alliances context: past, present and future
Bamel, N., Pereira, V. E., Bamel, U. K., & Cappiello, G. (2021) · Journal of Knowledge Management · doi:10.1108/jkm-06-2020-0443 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Prevalence of potentially predatory publishing in Scopus on the country level
Marina, T., & Андреевич, С. И. (2021) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-021-03899-x · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Identification of milestone papers through time-balanced network centrality
Mariani, M. S., Medo, M., & Zhang, Y. (2016) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2016.10.005 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
The effect of Russian University Excellence Initiative on publications and collaboration patterns
Matveeva, N., Sterligov, I., & Yudkevich, M. (2021) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2020.101110 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
Sustainability Research in the Wine Industry: A Bibliometric Approach
Montalvo‐Falcón, J. V., Sánchez‐García, E., Marco‐Lajara, B., & Martínez‐Falcó, J. (2023) · Agronomy · doi:10.3390/agronomy13030871 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
The convergence of BIM, AI and IoT: Reshaping the future of prefabricated construction
Rangasamy, V., & Yang, J.-B. (2024) · Journal of Building Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.jobe.2024.108606 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
The memory of science: Inflation, myopia, and the knowledge network
Pan, R. K., Petersen, A. M., Pammolli, F., & Fortunato, S. (2018) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2018.06.005 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
Can the journal impact factor be used as a criterion for the selection of junior researchers? A large-scale empirical study based on ResearcherID data
Bornmann, L., & Williams, R. A. (2017) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2017.06.001 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
Change of perspective: bibliometrics from the point of view of cited references—a literature overview on approaches to the evaluation of cited references in bibliometrics
Marx, W., & Bornmann, L. (2016) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-016-2111-2 · Cited by 78 · see citing works
Do open access journal articles experience a citation advantage? Results and methodological reflections of an application of multiple measures to an analysis by WoS subject areas
Basson, I., Blanckenberg, J. P., & Prozesky, H. (2020) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-020-03734-9 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
Analyzing linguistic complexity and scientific impact
Lu, C., Bu, Y., Dong, X., Wang, J., Ding, Y., Larivière, V., Sugimoto, C. R., Paul, L., & Zhang, C. (2019) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2019.07.004 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
A bibliometric performance analysis of publication productivity in the corporate social responsibility field: Outcomes of SciVal analytics
Cucari, N., Tutore, I., Montera, R., & Profita, S. (2022) · Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management · doi:10.1002/csr.2346 · Cited by 77 · see citing works

Authors: Waltman, L.
Affiliations: Leiden University (NL)
Corresponding author: Waltman, Ludo
ORCID: Waltman, Ludo
Venue: Journal of Informetrics
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Published: 2016-05
Volume: 10
Issue: 2
Pages: 365-391
ISSN: 1751-1577 (ISSN-L)
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2016.02.007
OpenAlex: W767067438
Semantic Scholar: 83199b297541263fd15b057797e0093e528602ae
Cited by: 1,356
References: 377
Citations by year: 2026: 204 · 2025: 135 · 2024: 137 · 2023: 158 · 2022: 142 · 2021: 135 · 2020: 128 · 2019: 104 · 2018: 107 · 2017: 71 · 2016: 32 · 2015: 3
FWCI: 97.17
Type: journal article
Language: en
Open access: closed
Licence: www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations: Journal of Informetrics (publishedVersion)
Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Funders: Higher Education Funding Council for England
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: citation impact indicators, research evaluation, bibliographic databases, Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar, indicator normalization, field normalization, journal impact indicators

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

A review of the literature on citation impact indicators

Abstract

Integrity signals

Claims the paper makes

Claims other papers make about this one

Cites

Cited by

Related

Record

About these checks