Abstract
The increasing use of bibliometric indicators in science policy calls for a reassessment of their robustness and limits. The perimeter of journal inclusion within ISI databases will determine variations in the classic bibliometric indicators used for international comparison, such as world shares of publications or relative impacts. We show in this article that when this perimeter is adjusted using a natural criterion for inclusion of journals, the journal impact, the variation of the most common country indicators (publication and citation shares; relative impacts) with the perimeter chosen depends on two phenomena. The first one is a bibliometric regularity rooted in the main features of competition in the open space of science, that can be modeled by bibliometric laws, the parameters of which are “coverage-independent” indicators. But this regularity is obscured for many countries by a second phenomenon, the presence of a sub-population of journals that does not reflect the same international openness, the nationally-oriented journals. As a result indicators based on standard SCI or SCISearch perimeters are jeopardized to a certain extent by this sub-population which creates large irregularities. These irregularities often lead to an over-estimation of share and an under-estimation of the impact, for countries with national editorial tradition, while the impact of a few mainstream countries arguably benefits from the presence of this sub-population.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barré, R. (1999), Ed., Science & Technologie, Indicateurs Edition 2000, Rapport de l'OST, dec. 1999, 464 p, Economica, Paris.
Barré, R. (2001), The agora model of innovation systems: S&T indicators for a democratic knowledge society, Research Evaluation 10 (1): 13–18.
Basu, A. (1998), Science publication indicators for India: Questions of interpretation. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Science Indicators, pp. 25–26. Cambridge, CWTS-SPRU.
Bonitz, M. (1999), The Matthew index, concentration patterns and Matthew core journals, Scientometrics, 44 (3): 361–378.
Bookstein, A. (1990), Infometric distributions, Part II: Resilience to ambiguity, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 41 (5): 376–386.
Egghe, L. (1991), The exact place of Zipf's and Pareto's law amongst the classical informetric law, Scientometrics, 20 (1): 93–106.
Garfield, E. (1955), Citation indexes for science, Science, 122 (3159): 108–111.
Gibbons, M. (1999), Science's new social contract with society, Nature, 402: C81–84.
Haitun, S. D. (1982), Stationary scientometric distributions, Part III. The role of the Zipf distribution, Scientometrics, 4 (3): 181–194.
Katz, S. (1999), The self-similar science system, Research Policy, 28: 501–517.
Kostoff, R. N. (1997), Citation analysis cross-field normalization, a new paradigm, Scientometrics, 39 (3): 225–230.
Kostoff, R. N. (1998), The under-reporting of research impact, The Scientist, 12 (18): 9.
Leydesdorf, L., S. Cozzens (1993), The delineation of specialties in terms of journals using the dynamic journal set of the SCI, Scientometrics, 26 (1): 135–156.
Moed, H. F. (1996), Differences in the construction of SCI based bibliometric indicators among various producers: A first overview, Scientometrics, 35 (2): 177–191.
Moravcsik, M. J. (1988), The coverage of science in the Third World: The Philadelphia program. In: Egghe L., Rousseau R. (Eds), Informetrics, 87/88: 147–155. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Murugesan, P., M. J. Moravcsik (1978), Variation of the nature of citation measures with journals and scientific disciplines, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 28: 141–155.
Narin, F. (1976), Evaluative Bibliometrics: the Use of Publication and Citation Analysis in the Evaluation of Scientific Activity, NSF Contract C-627, 456 p.
Price, D. J. DE SOLLA (1976), A general theory of bibliometric and other cumulative advantage processes, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 27: 292–306.
Schubert, A., T. Braun (1986), Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact, Scientometrics, 9 (5–6): 281–291.
Schubert, A., T. Braun (1996), Cross-field normalization of scientometric indicators, Scientometrics, 36 (3): 311–324.
Sigogneau, A. (2000), Analysis of document types published in journals related to physics, Scientometrics, 47 (3): 589–604.
Sivertsen, G. (1992), Should a new bibliometric database for international comparisons be more restricted in journal coverage? In: Science and Technology in a policy context, Selected Proceedings of the Joint EC-Leiden Conference on Science & Technology Indicators, DSWO Press, 1992, pp. 35–50.
Van leeuwen, T.N., H. F. Moed, R. J. W. Tijssen, M. S. Visser, A. F. J. Van raan (2001), Language biases in the coverage of science citation index and its consequences for international comparison of national research performance, Scientometrics, 51 (1): 335–346.
Van Raan, A. F. J. (2001), Competition among scientists for publication status: toward a model of scientific publication and citation distribution, Scientometrics, 51 (1): 347–357.
Wormell, I. (1998), Informetric analysis of the international impact of scientific journals: How international are the international journals? Journal of Documentation, 54 (5): 584–605.
Zitt, M., E. BASSECOULARD (1998), Internationalization of scientific journals: A measurement based on publication and citation scope, Scientometrics, 41 (1–2): 255–271.
Zitt, M., F. Perrot, R. Barré (1998), The transition from “national” to “transnational” and related measures of countries' performance, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49 (1): 30–42.
Zitt, M., E. Bassecoulard (1999), Internationalization of communication: A view on the evolution of scientific journals, Scientometrics, 46 (3): 669–685.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zitt, M., Ramanana-Rahary, S. & Bassecoulard, E. Correcting glasses help fair comparisons in international science landscape: Country indicators as a function of ISI database delineation. Scientometrics 56, 259–282 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021923329277
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021923329277