Fractional counting of citations in research evaluation: A cross- and interdisciplinary assessment of the Tsinghua University in Beijing

Publication year: 2011 Source: Journal of Informetrics, Volume 5, Issue 3, July 2011, Pages 360-368 Ping Zhou, Loet Leydesdorff In the case of the scientometric evaluation of multi- or interdisciplinary units one risks to compare apples with oranges: each paper has to be assessed in comparison to an appropriate reference set. We suggest that the set of citing papers can be considered as the relevant representation of the field of impact

Publication year: 2011 Source: Journal of Informetrics, Volume 5, Issue 3, July 2011, Pages 360-368 Ping Zhou, Loet Leydesdorff In the case of the scientometric evaluation of multi- or interdisciplinary units one risks to compare apples with oranges: each paper has to be assessed in comparison to an appropriate reference set. We suggest that the set of citing papers can be considered as the relevant representation of the field of impact

See the original article here:
Fractional counting of citations in research evaluation: A cross- and interdisciplinary assessment of the Tsinghua University in Beijing

Related posts:

  1. On the efficiency and predictability of strain energy for the evaluation of liquefaction potential: A numerical study
  2. Multivariate approach to classify research institutes according to their outputs: The case of the CSIC’s institutes
  3. Intrinsic foot and ankle mobility during cross-slope running
  4. Coefficient of cross correlation analysis of kinematics during walking barefoot and in Vibram FiveFingers®
  5. Axial Loading Cross Screw Fixation for the Austin Bunionectomy
  6. Evaluation of the short and medium term use of insoles for personalised footwear
  7. Articles vs. proceedings papers: Do they differ in research relevance and impact? A case study in the Library and Information Science field
  8. Assessment of reginal plantar shear forces at sub-MTH pad/foot-supporting interface in walking
  9. Measurement frequency of pedobarographic systems for evaluation of the foot–ground interaction in walking
  10. Subjective evaluation of biomechanical shoe properties during blinded and non-blinded running