Model-based evaluation of scientific impact indicators

被引:17
作者
Medo, Matus [1 ]
Cimini, Giulio [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Fribourg, Dept Phys, CH-1700 Fribourg, Switzerland
[2] IMT Sch Adv Studies, I-55100 Lucca, Italy
[3] CNR, ISC, I-00185 Rome, Italy
关键词
CITATION IMPACT; AUTHOR; INDEX; UNIVERSALITY; ADVANTAGE;
D O I
10.1103/PhysRevE.94.032312
中图分类号
O35 [流体力学]; O53 [等离子体物理学];
学科分类号
070204 ; 080103 ; 080704 ;
摘要
Using bibliometric data artificially generated through a model of citation dynamics calibrated on empirical data, we compare several indicators for the scientific impact of individual researchers. The use of such a controlled setup has the advantage of avoiding the biases present in real databases, and it allows us to assess which aspects of the model dynamics and which traits of individual researchers a particular indicator actually reflects. We find that the simple average citation count of the authored papers performs well in capturing the intrinsic scientific ability of researchers, regardless of the length of their career. On the other hand, when productivity complements ability in the evaluation process, the notorious h and g indices reveal their potential, yet their normalized variants do not always yield a fair comparison between researchers at different career stages. Notably, the use of logarithmic units for citation counts allows us to build simple indicators with performance equal to that of h and g. Our analysis may provide useful hints for a proper use of bibliometric indicators. Additionally, our framework can be extended by including other aspects of the scientific production process and citation dynamics, with the potential to become a standard tool for the assessment of impact metrics.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 52 条
[1]   The effect of highly cited papers on national citation indicators [J].
Aksnes, DW ;
Sivertsen, G .
SCIENTOMETRICS, 2004, 59 (02) :213-224
[2]   Statistical mechanics of complex networks [J].
Albert, R ;
Barabási, AL .
REVIEWS OF MODERN PHYSICS, 2002, 74 (01) :47-97
[3]   h-Index: A review focused in its variants, computation and standardization for different scientific fields [J].
Alonso, S. ;
Cabrerizo, F. J. ;
Herrera-Viedma, E. ;
Herrera, F. .
JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, 2009, 3 (04) :273-289
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2008, Ethics in science and environmental politics, DOI [10.3354/esep00079, DOI 10.3354/ESEP00079]
[5]   Is it possible to compare researchers with different scientific interests? [J].
Batista, Pablo D. ;
Campiteli, Monica G. ;
Kinouchi, Osame ;
Martinez, Alexandre S. .
SCIENTOMETRICS, 2006, 68 (01) :179-189
[6]   INFORMATION FILTERING AND INFORMATION-RETRIEVAL - 2 SIDES OF THE SAME COIN [J].
BELKIN, NJ ;
CROFT, WB .
COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM, 1992, 35 (12) :29-38
[7]   The effect of the initial network configuration on preferential attachment [J].
Berset, Yves ;
Medo, Matus .
EUROPEAN PHYSICAL JOURNAL B, 2013, 86 (06)
[8]   The simultaneous evolution of author and paper networks [J].
Börner, K ;
Maru, JT ;
Goldstone, RL .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2004, 101 :5266-5273
[9]  
Bornmann L., ARXIV160200419
[10]   How good is research really? - Measuring the citation impact of publications with percentiles increases correct assessments and fair comparisons [J].
Bornmann, Lutz ;
Marx, Werner .
EMBO REPORTS, 2013, 14 (03) :226-230