The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Measurement of Intellectual Influence
Open accessAbstract
We examine the problem of measuring influence based on the information contained in the data on the communications between scholarly publications, judicial decisions, patents, web pages, and other entities. The measurement of influence is useful to address several empirical questions such as reputation, prestige, aspects of the diffusion of knowledge, the markets for scientists and scientific publications, the dynamics of innovation, ranking algorithms of search engines in the World Wide Web, and others. In this paper we ask why any given methodology is reasonable and informative applying the axiomatic method. We find that a unique ranking method can be characterized by means of five axioms: Anonymity, invariance to citation intensity, weak homogeneity, weak consistency, and invariance to splitting of journals. This method is easily implementable and turns out to be different from those regularly used in social and natural sciences, arts and humanities, and computer science.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Garfield, E. (1972) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.178.4060.471 · Cited by 2,788
Cited by
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
Opinion dynamics via search engines (and other algorithmic gatekeepers)
Germano, F., & Sobbrio, F. (2020) · Journal of Public Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104188 · Cited by 11
Metadata
- Authors
- Palacios-Huerta, I., & Volij, O.
- Venue
- Econometrica
- Publisher
- The Econometric Society
- Published
- 2004-05
- Volume
- 72
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 963-977
- ISSN
- 0012-9682 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-0262
- OpenAlex
- W3125814070
- Cited by
- 328
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 12.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
