Journal: Journal of Informetrics
Loading...
Abbreviation
Publisher
Elsevier
29 results
Search Results
Publications 1 - 10 of 29
- The advantage of the use of samples in evaluative bibliometric studiesItem type: Other Journal Item
Journal of InformetricsBornmann, Lutz; Mutz, Rüdiger (2013) - A meta-evaluation of scientific research proposalsItem type: Journal Article
Journal of InformetricsBornmann, Lutz; Leydesdorff, Loet; Besselaar, Peter van den (2010) - How to consider fractional counting and field normalization in the statistical modeling of bibliometric data: A multilevel Poisson regression approachItem type: Journal Article
Journal of InformetricsMutz, Rüdiger; Daniel, Hans-Dieter (2019)The numerical-algorithmic procedures of fractional counting and field normalization are often mentioned as indispensable requirements for bibliometric analyses. Against the background of the increasing importance of statistics in bibliometrics, a multilevel Poisson regression model (level 1: publication, level 2: author) shows possible ways to consider fractional counting and field normalization in a statistical model (fractional counting I). However, due to the assumption of duplicate publications in the data set, the approach is not quite optimal. Therefore, a more advanced approach, a multilevel multiple membership model, is proposed that no longer provides for duplicates (fractional counting II). It is assumed that the citation impact can essentially be attributed to time-stable dispositions of researchers as authors who contribute with different fractions to the success of a publication’s citation. The two approaches are applied to bibliometric data for 254 scientists working in social science methodology. A major advantage of fractional counting II is that the results no longer depend on the type of fractional counting (e.g., equal weighting). Differences between authors in rankings are reproduced more clearly than on the basis of percentiles. In addition, the strong importance of field normalization is demonstrated; 60% of the citation variance is explained by field normalization. - Latent Markov modeling applied to grant peer reviewItem type: Journal Article
Journal of InformetricsBornmann, Lutz; Mutz, Rüdiger; Daniel, Hans-Dieter (2008) - Extent of type I and type II errors in editorial decisionsItem type: Journal Article
Journal of InformetricsBornmann, Lutz; Daniel, Hans-Dieter (2009) - Gatekeepers of scienceItem type: Journal Article
Journal of InformetricsBornmann, Lutz; Daniel, Hans-Dieter (2007) - Convergent validation of peer review decisions using the h indexItem type: Journal Article
Journal of InformetricsBornmann, Lutz; Daniel, Hans-Dieter (2007) - Quantifying and suppressing ranking bias in a large citation networkItem type: Journal Article
Journal of InformetricsVaccario, Giacomo; Medo, Matúš; Wider, Nicolas; et al. (2017) - Assessing impact and quality from local dynamics of citation networksItem type: Journal Article
Journal of InformetricsRoth, Camille; Wu, Jiang; Lozano, Sergi (2012) - How to detect indications of potential sources of bias in peer reviewItem type: Journal Article
Journal of InformetricsBornmann, Lutz; Mutz, Rüdiger; Daniel, Hans-Dieter (2008)
Publications 1 - 10 of 29