The DOI matches its Crossref record; 359 of the 377 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A review of the literature on citation impact indicators
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.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“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]
In the citing paper
“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
In the citing paper
“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]
In the citing paper
“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 the citing paper
“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]
In the citing paper
“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]
In the citing paper
“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]
In the citing paper
“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 the citing paper
“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]
In the citing paper
“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]
In the citing paper
“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]
In the citing paper
“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]
In the citing paper
“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]
In the citing paper
“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]
In the citing paper
“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]
In the citing paper
“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]
In the citing paper
“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]
Citations
Cites
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
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
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
Visualizing Bibliometric Networks
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2014) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-10377-8_13 · Cited by 3,884
Self-citationThe 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
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
Self-citationGarfield, E. (1972) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.178.4060.471 · Cited by 2,788
The History and Meaning of the Journal Impact Factor
Garfield, E. (2006) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.295.1.90 · Cited by 2,770
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
Theory and practise of the g-index
Egghe, L. (2006) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0144-7 · Cited by 2,354
Flagged first, then by citations
18 of the 377 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Albarrán, 2011, High-and low-impact citation measures: Empirical applications, Journal of Informetrics, 5, 122, 10.1016/j.joi.2010.10.001 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 201–300 of 1,003
Ren, K., & Lam, J. F. I. (2026) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-025-06186-9 · Cited by 36
Fagan, J. C. (2017) · Information Technology and Libraries · doi:10.6017/ital.v36i2.9718 · Cited by 43
Aleixandre-Tudó, J. L., Bolaños-Pizarro, M., Aleixandre, J. L., & Aleixandre‐Benavent, R. (2020) · Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · doi:10.1021/acs.jafc.0c02141 · Cited by 36
Yang, A. J., Hu, H., Zhao, Y., Wang, H., & Deng, S. (2023) · Information Processing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2023.103420 · Cited by 38
Kouropalatis, Y., Giudici, A., & Acar, O. A. (2018) · Industrial Marketing Management · doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.11.012 · Cited by 37
Yang, S., Zheng, M., Yu, Y., & Wolfram, D. (2020) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2020.101120 · Cited by 35
Past, present, and future research on self-service merchandising: a co-word and text mining approach
Muñoz‐Leiva, F., Rodríguez-López, M. E., Liébana-Cabanillas, F. J., & Moro, S. (2021) · European Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1108/ejm-02-2019-0179 · Cited by 36
The Influence of International Collaboration on the Scientific Impact in V4 Countries
Kohus, Z., Demeter, M., Szigeti, G. P., Kun, L., Lukács, E., & Czakó, K. F. (2022) · Publications · doi:10.3390/publications10040035 · Cited by 37
Team formation and team impact: The balance between team freshness and repeat collaboration
Liu, M., Jaiswal, A. K., Bu, Y., Min, C., Yang, S., Liu, Z., Acuna, D. E., & Ding, Y. (2022) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2022.101337 · Cited by 38
Benítez-Núñez, C., Díaz, N. L. D., Rodríguez, J. L. B., & Pérez, P. D. S. (2024) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2024.2307965 · Cited by 34
Economic complexity and the sustainability transition: a review of data, methods, and literature
Caldarola, B., Mazzilli, D., Napolitano, L., Patelli, A., & Sbardella, A. (2024) · Journal of Physics Complexity · doi:10.1088/2632-072x/ad4f3d · Cited by 35
Bibliometric analysis of micro-nano manufacturing technologies
Bodnariuk, M., & Melentiev, R. (2019) · Nanotechnology and Precision Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.npe.2019.05.001 · Cited by 34
Petersohn, S., & Heinze, T. (2017) · Science and Public Policy · doi:10.1093/scipol/scx084 · Cited by 34
Citation Success Index − An Intuitive Pair-Wise Journal Comparison Metric
Milojević, S., Radicchi, F., & Bar-Ilan, J. (2017) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2016.12.006 · Cited by 33
Dede, E., & Özdemir, E. (2022) · Journal of Pedagogical Research · doi:10.33902/jpr.202216829 · Cited by 33
A bibliometric review on electric vehicle (EV) energy efficiency and emission effect research
Yao, S., Bian, Z., Hasan, M. K., Ding, R., Li, S., Wang, Y., & Song, S. (2023) · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · doi:10.1007/s11356-023-29143-y · Cited by 33
Pandey, J. K. (2023) · Transforming Government People Process and Policy · doi:10.1108/tg-08-2023-0113 · Cited by 33
Matthew effects in science and the serial diffusion of ideas: Testing old ideas with new methods
Farys, R., & Wolbring, T. (2021) · Quantitative Science Studies · doi:10.1162/qss_a_00129 · Cited by 33
Analysis of the new scopus CiteScore
Fang, H. (2021) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-021-03964-5 · Cited by 33
Ndou, V., Mele, G., Hysa, E., & Manta, O. P. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su14105917 · Cited by 33
Hasumi, T., & Chiu, M.-S. (2022) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-022-04441-3 · Cited by 37
The scientific influence of nations on global scientific and technological development
Patelli, A., Cimini, G., Pugliese, E., & Gabrielli, A. (2017) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2017.10.005 · Cited by 33
See you on the Metaverse: A bibliometric expedition through the Metaverse landscape
Aiolfi, S., & Luceri, B. (2024) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123605 · Cited by 32
Xu, D., & Xu, Z. (2024) · Artificial Intelligence in Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.artmed.2024.102950 · Cited by 32
Mohamed, M. A., Al-Mhdawi, M. K. S., Ojiako, U., Dacre, N., Qazi, A. J., & Rahimian, F. P. (2025) · Urbanization, sustainability and society. · doi:10.1108/uss-11-2024-0069 · Cited by 32
The solitude of stars. An analysis of the distributed excellence model of European universities
Bonaccorsi, A. J., Haddawy, P., Cicero, T., & Hassan, S. (2017) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2017.02.003 · Cited by 32
ORBAY, K., Miranda, R., & ORBAY, M. (2020) · Participatory Educational Research · doi:10.17275/per.20.26.7.2 · Cited by 32
Xu, J., Li, M., Jiang, J., Ge, B., & Cai, M. (2019) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2019.2927011 · Cited by 32
Hu, Z., Tian, W., Xu, S., Zhang, C., & Wang, X. (2018) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2018.09.006 · Cited by 31
Impact Factors and the Central Limit Theorem: Why Citation Averages Are Scale Dependent
Antonoyiannakis, M. (2018) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2018.08.011 · Cited by 31
A half-century of global collaboration in science and the “Shrinking World”
Okamura, K. (2023) · Quantitative Science Studies · doi:10.1162/qss_a_00268 · Cited by 34
Abbas, K., Hasan, M. K., Abbasi, A., Mokhtar, U. A., Khan, A., Abdullah, S. N. H. S., Dong, S., Islam, S., Alboaneen, D., & Ahmed, F. R. A. (2023) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2023.3290906 · Cited by 35
Issa, H.-E. A., Thai, M. T. T., & Nguyen, H. T. T. (2024) · The International Journal of Management Education · doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2024.101025 · Cited by 31
A review on the novelty measurements of academic papers
Zhao, Y., & Zhang, C. (2025) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-025-05234-0 · Cited by 37
Singh, P., Piryani, R., Singh, V. K., & Pinto, D. (2020) · Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems · doi:10.3233/jifs-179906 · Cited by 34
Current State and Development of Green Bonds Market in the Latin America and the Caribbean
Mejía-Escobar, J. C., González-Ruíz, J. D., & Sepúlveda, G. F. (2021) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su131910872 · Cited by 31
Beyond the “ivory tower”. Comparing academic and non-academic knowledge on social entrepreneurship
Bernardi, P. D., Bertello, A., Forliano, C., & Orlandi, L. B. (2021) · International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal · doi:10.1007/s11365-021-00783-1 · Cited by 31
Rural proofing entrepreneurship in two fields of research
Nulleshi, S. G., & Tillmar, M. (2022) · International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research · doi:10.1108/ijebr-05-2021-0323 · Cited by 31
A twenty years bibliometric analysis (2002 – 2021) of business economics research in ASEAN
Harsanto, B., & Firmansyah, E. A. (2023) · Cogent Business & Management · doi:10.1080/23311975.2023.2194467 · Cited by 31
Cradock-Henry, N. A., Kirk, N., Ricart, S., Diprose, G., & Kannemeyer, R. L. (2023) · Environmental Research Letters · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ace0ce · Cited by 33
The Perception of Scientific Authorship Across Domains
Johann, D., & Mayer, S. J. (2018) · Minerva · doi:10.1007/s11024-018-9363-3 · Cited by 30
Hammoda, B., & |, |. (2024) · Knowledge Management & E-Learning An International Journal · doi:10.34105/j.kmel.2024.16.015 · Cited by 30
Xu, S., Mariani, M. S., Lü, L., & Medo, M. (2020) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2019.101005 · Cited by 30
Vílchez‐Román, C., Sanguinetti, S., & Salas, M. (2020) · Library Hi Tech · doi:10.1108/lht-10-2019-0209 · Cited by 30
Vȋiu, G.-A., & Păunescu, M. (2021) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-020-03801-1 · Cited by 30
Efficiency of European Universities: A Comparison of Peers
Herberholz, L., & Wigger, B. U. (2020) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2021.104314 · Cited by 30
Research on education in Southeast Asia (1996–2019): a bibliometric review
Barrot, J. S. (2021) · Educational Review · doi:10.1080/00131911.2021.1907313 · Cited by 30
Finance journal rankings: Active scholar assessment revisited
Currie, R. R., & Pandher, G. S. (2019) · Journal of Banking & Finance · doi:10.1016/j.jbankfin.2019.105717 · Cited by 30
The role of gender and coauthors in academic publication behavior
Schmal, W. B., Haucap, J., & Knoke, L. (2023) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2023.104874 · Cited by 29
Canales, M., Castilla‐Rho, J., Rojas, R., Vicuna, S. D., & Ball, J. (2024) · Environmental Modelling & Software · doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2024.105980 · Cited by 32
Categorization and correlational analysis of quality factors influencing citation
Khatoon, A., Daud, A. Y., & Amjad, T. (2024) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-023-10657-3 · Cited by 29
Peralta, M. A. C., Martínez, J. L. V., & Castillo-Heredia, L. (2024) · Results in Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.rineng.2024.103782 · Cited by 29
A bibliometric study of co-authorship in Translation Studies
Rovira-Esteva, S., Aixelá, J. F., & Olalla-Soler, C. (2020) · ONOMAZEIN · doi:10.7764/onomazein.47.09 · Cited by 29
Ten years of Arabian Journal of Chemistry: A bibliometric analysis
Hassan, W., Zafar, M., Hassan, H., Kamdem, J. P., Duarte, A. E., & da Rocha, J. B. T. (2020) · Arabian Journal of Chemistry · doi:10.1016/j.arabjc.2020.09.007 · Cited by 29
Ryan, J. C. (2020) · Personnel Review · doi:10.1108/pr-12-2019-0676 · Cited by 31
Yu, D., & Pan, T. (2021) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2021.101136 · Cited by 29
Standards of Graph Construction in Special Education Research: A Review of their Use and Relevance
Kubina, R. M., Kostewicz, D. E., King, S. A., Brennan, K. M., Wertalik, J. L., Rizzo, K. L., & Markelz, A. (2021) · Education and Treatment of Children · doi:10.1007/s43494-021-00053-3 · Cited by 29
Academic social networks metrics: an effective indicator for university performance?
Wiechetek, Ł., & Pastuszak, Z. (2022) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-021-04258-6 · Cited by 29
Chien, T., Wang, H., Kan, W., & Su, S. (2019) · Medicine · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000017631 · Cited by 28
Quantifying and suppressing ranking bias in a large citation network
Vaccario, G., Medo, M., Wider, N., & Mariani, M. S. (2017) · reroDoc Digital Library · doi:10.7892/boris.108621 · Cited by 28
A decade of the international journal of lean six sigma: bibliometric overview
Prakash, S., Kumar, S., Soni, G., Mahto, R. V., & Pandey, N. (2021) · International Journal of Lean Six Sigma · doi:10.1108/ijlss-12-2020-0219 · Cited by 28
Mining the evolutionary process of knowledge through multiple relationships between keywords
Zhang, X., Xie, Q. S., Song, C., & Song, M. (2022) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-022-04272-2 · Cited by 28
Samala, A. D., Usmeldi, Taali, Indarta, Y., Apdoludin, A., Hakiki, M. A., & Leong, K. (2023) · International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (iJIM) · doi:10.3991/ijim.v17i05.36503 · Cited by 28
A categorization of arguments for counting methods for publication and citation indicators
Gauffriau, M. (2017) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2017.05.009 · Cited by 28
Forward search path count as an alternative indirect citation impact indicator
Jiang, X., & Zhuge, H. (2019) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2019.100977 · Cited by 28
All Along the h-Index-related Literature: A Guided Tour
Schubert, A. P., & Schubert, G. A. (2019) · Springer handbooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-02511-3_12 · Cited by 27
Lorenzo, G., Newbutt, N. A., & Lorenzo-Lledó, . (2021) · Journal of Computers in Education · doi:10.1007/s40692-021-00202-y · Cited by 29
Halil Kilicoglu, B., Peng, Z., Tafreshi, S., Tran, T., Rosemblat, G., & Schneider, J. (2019) · Journal of Biomedical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103123 · Cited by 28
Top‐Cited Articles from Dental Education Journals, 2009 to 2018: A Bibliometric Analysis
Ullah, R., Adnan, S., & Afzal, A. S. (2019) · Journal of Dental Education · doi:10.21815/jde.019.153 · Cited by 27
Lin, C., Chou, P., Chou, W., & Chien, T. (2019) · Schizophrenia Research · doi:10.1016/j.schres.2019.10.058 · Cited by 27
Ertaş, M., & Kozak, M. (2020) · Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.jhtm.2020.03.001 · Cited by 27
Bornmann, L., Haunschild, R., & Mutz, R. (2020) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2020.101098 · Cited by 26
Search and Selection Procedures of Literature Reviews in Behavior Analysis
King, S. A., Kostewicz, D. E., Enders, O. G., Burch, T., Chitiyo, A., Taylor, J., DeMaria, S., & Reid, M. (2020) · Perspectives on Behavior Science · doi:10.1007/s40614-020-00265-9 · Cited by 26
Karim, M., Missen, M. M. S., Umer, M., Sadiq, S., Mohamed, A., & Ashraf, I. (2022) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app12063203 · Cited by 26
Fostering a research integrity culture: Actionable advice for institutions
Peuter, S. D., & Conix, S. (2022) · Science and Public Policy · doi:10.1093/scipol/scac059 · Cited by 26
Blue economy and aquaculture before and during the pandemic era: a systematic literature review
Silvestri, R., Morrone, D., Vecchio, P. D., & Mele, G. (2022) · British Food Journal · doi:10.1108/bfj-07-2022-0660 · Cited by 26
Kurtz, M. J., & Henneken, E. A. (2016) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.23689 · Cited by 29
Scholarly Metrics Baseline: A Survey of Faculty Knowledge, Use, and Opinion about Scholarly Metrics
DeSanto, D. L., & Nichols, A. (2017) · College & Research Libraries · doi:10.5860/crl.78.2.150 · Cited by 26
Analysing scientific collaborations of new zealand institutions using scopus bibliometric data
Aref, S., Friggens, D., & Hendy, S. C. (2018) · Australasian Computer Science Week Multiconference (ACSW) · doi:10.1145/3167918.3167920 · Cited by 26
Fernández, N., Niño, A. P., Azuero, A. J., O’Kelly, F., Hannick, J. H., Rickard, M., Kirsch, A. J., Caldamone, A. A., & Koyle, M. A. (2018) · Journal of Pediatric Urology · doi:10.1016/j.jpurol.2018.04.004 · Cited by 26
Research Interest: another undisclosed (and redundant) algorithm by ResearchGate
Copiello, S. (2019) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-019-03124-w · Cited by 26
Perianes‐Rodríguez, A., & Olmeda‐Gómez, C. (2019) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-019-03265-y · Cited by 26
Productive scientists are associated with lower disruption in scientific publishing
Li, H., Tessone, C. J., & Zeng, A. (2024) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2322462121 · Cited by 28
Providing meaningful information: Part B—Bibliometric analysis
Belter, C. (2018) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-102017-3.00004-8 · Cited by 25
Bornmann, L., Ye, A. Y., & Ye, F. Y. (2018) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-018-2772-0 · Cited by 25
Zuo, Z., & Zhao, K. (2020) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.24415 · Cited by 25
A retrospective overview ofJournal of Enterprise Information Managementusing bibliometric analysis
Donthu, N., Badhotiya, G. K., Kumar, S., Soni, G., & Pandey, N. (2021) · Journal of Enterprise Information Management · doi:10.1108/jeim-09-2020-0375 · Cited by 25
McNicholas, P. J., Floyd, R. G., Fennimore, L. E., & Fitzpatrick, S. A. (2021) · Journal of School Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2021.11.001 · Cited by 25
Fifty years of Energy Policy: A bibliometric overview
Yao, Y., Du, H., Zou, H., Zhou, P., Antunes, C. H., Neumann, A., & Yeh, S. (2023) · Energy Policy · doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2023.113769 · Cited by 27
Rescaling the disruption index reveals the universality of disruption distributions in science
Yang, A. J., Gong, H., Wang, Y., Zhang, C., & Deng, S. (2023) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-023-04889-x · Cited by 29
Number of references: a large-scale study of interval ratios
Nicolaisen, J., & Frandsen, T. F. (2020) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-020-03764-3 · Cited by 25
Limaymanta, C. H., de García, R. Q. P., Villena, J. A. R., Rojas-Arroyo, A., & Gregorio-Chaviano, O. (2022) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-022-04523-2 · Cited by 24
Understanding market sentiment analysis: A survey
Heydarian, P., Bifet, A., & Corbet, S. (2024) · Journal of Economic Surveys · doi:10.1111/joes.12645 · Cited by 25
Osório, A. M. M. (2018) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-018-2815-6 · Cited by 24
Rose, R., Hölzle, K., & Björk, J. (2020) · Creativity and Innovation Management · doi:10.1111/caim.12361 · Cited by 24
Black swan: bibliometric analysis and development of research agenda
Parameswar, N., Chaubey, A., & Dhir, S. (2021) · Benchmarking An International Journal · doi:10.1108/bij-08-2020-0443 · Cited by 24
Geography of science: Competitiveness and inequality
Patelli, A., Napolitano, L., Cimini, G., & Gabrielli, A. (2022) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2022.101357 · Cited by 24
The association between prior knowledge and the disruption of an article
Sheng, L., Lyu, D., Ruan, X., Shen, H., & Cheng, Y. (2023) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-023-04751-0 · Cited by 24
Calò, F., Sancino, A., & Scognamiglio, F. (2024) · Public Management Review · doi:10.1080/14719037.2024.2311181 · Cited by 24
Haunschild, R., Schier, H., Marx, W., & Bornmann, L. (2018) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2018.03.004 · Cited by 24
Metadata
- 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)
- 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
- FWCI
- 97.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- 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 › Library and Information Sciences › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Web visibility and informetrics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
- Keywords
- citation impact 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
