Bensman, S. J. (2007). Garfield and the impact factor. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology,
41(1), 93–155.
Article
Google Scholar
Bensman, S. J., & Leydesdorff, L. (2009). Definition and identification of journals as bibliographic and subject entities: librarianship vs. ISI Journal Citation Reports (JCR) methods and their effect on citation measures. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
60(6), 1097–1117.
Article
Google Scholar
Bonaccorsi, A., & Vargas, J. (2010). Proliferation dynamics in new sciences. Research Policy,
39(8), 1034–1050.
Article
Google Scholar
Bornmann, L., & Leydesdorff, L. (2011). Which cities produce excellent papers worldwide more than can be expected? A new mapping approach—using Google Maps—based on statistical significance testing. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (in press). http://arxiv.org/abs/1103.3216.
Bornmann, L., Leydesdorff, L., & Van den Besselaar, P. (2010). A meta-evaluation of scientific research proposals: Different ways of comparing rejected to awarded applications. Journal of Informetrics,
4(3), 211–220.
Article
Google Scholar
Bornmann, L., & Mutz, R. (2011). Further steps towards an ideal method of measuring citation performance: The avoidance of citation (ratio) averages in field-normalization. Journal of Informetrics,
5(1), 228–230.
Article
Google Scholar
Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., Neuhaus, C., & Daniel, H. D. (2008). Citation counts for research evaluation: standards of good practice for analyzing bibliometric data and presenting and interpreting results. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics (ESEP),
8(1), 93–102.
Article
Google Scholar
Bornmann, L., Schier, H., Marx, W., & Daniel, H. D. (2011). Is interactive open access publishing able to identify high impact submissions? A study on the predictive validity of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics by using percentile rank classes. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
52(1), 61–71.
Article
Google Scholar
Boyack, K. W., & Klavans, R. (2011). Multiple dimensions of journal specificity: Why journals can’t be assigned to disciplines. In E. Noyons, P. Ngulube, & J. Leta (Eds.), The 13th conference of the international society for scientometrics and informetrics (Vol. I, pp. 123–133). Durban, South Africa: ISSI, Leiden University and the University of Zululand.
Google Scholar
Chan, L. M. (1999). A guide to the library of congress classification (5th ed.). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.
Google Scholar
Egghe, L. (2012). Averages of ratios compared to ratios of averages: Mathematical results. Journal of Informetrics,
6(2), 307–317.
Article
Google Scholar
Garfield, E. (1972). Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation. Science,
178(4060), 471–479.
Article
Google Scholar
Garfield, E. (1979a). Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool? Scientometrics,
1(4), 359–375.
Article
Google Scholar
Garfield, E. (1979b). Citation indexing: Its theory and application in science, technology, and humanities. New York: Wiley.
Google Scholar
Gingras, Y., & Larivière, V. (2011). There are neither “king” nor “crown” in scientometrics: Comments on a supposed “alternative” method of normalization. Journal of Informetrics,
5(1), 226–227.
Article
Google Scholar
Glänzel, W. (2007). Characteristic scores and scales: A bibliometric analysis of subject characteristics based on long-term citation observation. Journal of Informetrics,
1(1), 92–102.
Article
Google Scholar
Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2003). A new classification scheme of science fields and subfields designed for scientometric evaluation purposes. Scientometrics,
56(3), 357–367.
Article
Google Scholar
Glänzel, W., Thijs, B., Schubert, A., & Debackere, K. (2009). Subfield-specific normalized relative indicators and a new generation of relational charts: Methodological foundations illustrated on the assessment of institutional research performance. Scientometrics,
78(1), 165–188.
Article
Google Scholar
Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA,
102(46), 16569–16572.
Article
Google Scholar
Holm, S. (1979). A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 6(2), 65–70.
Google Scholar
Huang, C., Notten, A., & Rasters, N. (2011). Nanoscience and technology publications and patents: a review of social science studies and search strategies. The Journal of Technology Transfer,
36(2), 145–172.
Article
Google Scholar
Kamada, T., & Kawai, S. (1989). An algorithm for drawing general undirected graphs. Information Processing Letters,
31(1), 7–15.
MathSciNet
MATH
Article
Google Scholar
Levine, G. (1991). A guide to SPSS for analysis of variance. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Google Scholar
Leydesdorff, L. (2006). Can scientific journals be classified in terms of aggregated journal-journal citation relations using the journal citation reports? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
57(5), 601–613.
Article
Google Scholar
Leydesdorff, L. (2008). Caveats for the use of citation indicators in research and journal evaluation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
59(2), 278–287.
Article
Google Scholar
Leydesdorff, L. (2012). Alternatives to the journal impact factor: I3 and the top-10% (or top-25%?) of the most-highly cited papers. Scientometrics. doi:10.1007/s11192-11012-10660-11196.
Leydesdorff, L., & Bornmann, L. (2011a). How fractional counting affects the impact factor: Normalization in terms of differences in citation potentials among fields of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
62(2), 217–229.
Article
Google Scholar
Leydesdorff, L., & Bornmann, L. (2011b). Percentile ranks and the integrated impact indicator (I3). Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
62(11), 2133–2146.
Article
Google Scholar
Leydesdorff, L., & Bornmann, L. (in press). Percentile ranks and the integrated impact indicator (I3). Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.6281.
Leydesdorff, L., Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., & Opthof, T. (2011a). Turning the tables in citation analysis one more time: Principles for comparing sets of documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
62(7), 1370–1381.
Article
Google Scholar
Leydesdorff, L., Hammarfelt, B., & Salah, A. A. A. (2011b). The structure of the arts & humanities citation index: A mapping on the basis of aggregated citations among 1,157 journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(12), 2414–2426.
Google Scholar
Leydesdorff, L., & Opthof, T. (2010). Scopus’ source normalized impact per paper (SNIP) versus the journal impact factor based on fractional counting of citations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
61(11), 2365–2396.
Article
Google Scholar
Leydesdorff, L., & Persson, O. (2010). Mapping the geography of science: Distribution patterns and networks of relations among cities and institutes. Journal of the American Society of Information Science and Technology,
61(8), 1622–1634.
Google Scholar
Leydesdorff, L., & Rafols, I. (2012). Interactive overlays: A new method for generating global journal maps from web-of-science data. Journal of Informetrics,
6(3), 318–332.
Article
Google Scholar
Leydesdorff, L., & Shin, J. C. (2011). How to evaluate universities in terms of their relative citation impacts: Fractional counting of citations and the normalization of differences among disciplines. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
62(6), 1146–1155.
Article
Google Scholar
Leydesdorff, L., Zhou, P., & Bornmann, L. (in preparation). How can impact factors be normalized across fields of science? An assessment of science citation index 2010 in terms of percentile ranks and fractional counts.
Lundberg, J. (2007). Lifting the crown—citation z-score. Journal of Informetrics,
1(2), 145–154.
Article
Google Scholar
Moed, H. F. (2010). Measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals. Journal of Informetrics,
4(3), 265–277.
Article
Google Scholar
Moed, H. F., De Bruin, R. E., & Van Leeuwen, T. N. (1995). New bibliometric tools for the assessment of national research performance: Database description, overview of indicators and first applications. Scientometrics,
33(3), 381–422.
Article
Google Scholar
Narin, F. (1976). Evaluative bibliometrics: The use of publication and citation analysis in the evaluation of scientific activity. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
Google Scholar
National Science Board. (2010). Science and engineering indicators. Washington DC: National Science Foundation. http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind10/.
Nederhof, A. J. (2006). Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the social sciences and the humanities: A review. Scientometrics,
66(1), 81–100.
MathSciNet
Article
Google Scholar
Opthof, T., & Leydesdorff, L. (2010). Caveats for the journal and field normalizations in the CWTS (“Leiden”) evaluations of research performance. Journal of Informetrics,
4(3), 423–430.
Article
Google Scholar
Prathap, G. (2011). Fractionalized exergy for evaluating research performance. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
62(11), 2294–2295.
Google Scholar
Pudovkin, A. I., & Garfield, E. (2002). Algorithmic procedure for finding semantically related journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
53(13), 1113–1119.
Article
Google Scholar
Pudovkin, A. I., & Garfield, E. (2009). Percentile rank and author superiority indexes for evaluating individual journal articles and the author’s overall citation performance. CollNet Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management,
3(2), 3–10.
Google Scholar
Radicchi, F., & Castellano, C. (2012). Testing the fairness of citation indicators for comparison across scientific domains: the case of fractional citation counts. Journal of Informetrics,
6(1), 121–130.
Article
Google Scholar
Rafols, I., & Leydesdorff, L. (2009). Content-based and algorithmic classifications of journals: Perspectives on the dynamics of scientific communication and indexer effects. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
60(9), 1823–1835.
Article
Google Scholar
Rafols, I., Leydesdorff, L., O’Hare, A., Nightingale, P., & Stirling, A. (in press). How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between innovation studies and business & management. Research Policy.
Rafols, I., Porter, A., & Leydesdorff, L. (2010). Science overlay maps: A new tool for research policy and library management. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
61(9), 1871–1887.
Article
Google Scholar
Rousseau, R. (2012). Basic properties of both percentile rank scores and the I3 indicator. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
63(2), 416–420.
Article
Google Scholar
Schreiber, M. (in press). Inconsistencies of Recently Proposed Citation Impact Indicators and how to Avoid Them. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. Available at arXiv:1202.3861.
Schubert, A., & Braun, T. (1986). Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact. Scientometrics,
9(5), 281–291.
Article
Google Scholar
Seglen, P. O. (1992). The skewness of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science,
43(9), 628–638.
Article
Google Scholar
Seglen, P. O. (1997). Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. British Medical Journal,
314, 498–502.
Article
Google Scholar
Sher, I. H., & Garfield, E. (1965). New tools for improving and evaluating the effectiveness of research. Paper presented at the second conference on research program effectiveness, July 27–29, Washington, DC.
Sheskin, D. J. (2011). Handbook of parametric and nonparametric statistical procedures (5th ed.). Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
Google Scholar
Small, H., & Garfield, E. (1985). The geography of science: Disciplinary and national mappings. Journal of information science,
11(4), 147–159.
Article
Google Scholar
Small, H., & Sweeney, E. (1985). Clustering the science citation index using co-citations I. A comparison of methods. Scientometrics,
7, 391–409.
Article
Google Scholar
Vinkler, P. (1986). Evaluation of some methods for the relative assessment of scientific publications. Scientometrics,
10(3), 157–177.
Article
Google Scholar
Vinkler, P. (2010). The πv-index: A new indicator to characterize the impact of journals. Scientometrics,
82(3), 461–475.
Article
Google Scholar
Vinkler, P. (2011). Application of the distribution of citations among publications in scientometric evaluations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
62(10), 1963–1978.
Article
Google Scholar
Vinkler, P. (2012). The case of scientometricians with the “absolute relative” impact indicator. Journal of Informetrics,
6(2), 254–264.
Article
Google Scholar
Waltman, L., van Eck, N. J., van Leeuwen, T. N., Visser, M. S., & van Raan, A. F. J. (2011a). Towards a new crown indicator: An empirical analysis. Scientometrics,
87, 467–481.
Article
Google Scholar
Waltman, L., Van Eck, N. J., Van Leeuwen, T. N., Visser, M. S., & Van Raan, A. F. J. (2011b). Towards a new crown indicator: Some theoretical considerations. Journal of Informetrics,
5(1), 37–47.
Article
Google Scholar
Zhou, P., & Leydesdorff, L. (2011). Fractional counting of citations in research evaluation: A cross- and interdisciplinary assessment of the Tsinghua University in Beijing. Journal of Informetrics,
5(3), 360–368.
Article
Google Scholar
Zitt, M., & Small, H. (2008). Modifying the journal impact factor by fractional citation weighting: The audience factor. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
59(11), 1856–1860.
Article
Google Scholar