A note on comparison of scientific impact expressed by the number of citations in different fields of science

Citation distributions for 1992, 1994, 1996, 1997, 1999, and 2001, which were published in the 2004 report of the National Science Foundation, USA, are analyzed. It is shown that the ratio of the total number of citations of any two broad fields of science remains close to constant over the analyzed years. Based on this observation, normalization of total numbers of citations with respect to the number of citations in mathematics is suggested as a tool for comparing scientific impact expressed by the number of citations in different fields of science.Comment: 5 pages, 1 tabl

Unraveling the dynamics of growth, aging and inflation for citations to scientific articles from specific research fields

We analyze the time evolution of citations acquired by articles from journals of the American Physical Society (PRA, PRB, PRC, PRD, PRE and PRL). The observed change over time in the number of papers published in each journal is considered an exogenously caused variation in citability that is accounted for by a normalization. The appropriately inflation-adjusted citation rates are found to be separable into a preferential-attachment-type growth kernel and a purely obsolescence-related (i.e., monotonously decreasing as a function of time since publication) aging function. Variations in the empirically extracted parameters of the growth kernels and aging functions associated with different journals point to research-field-specific characteristics of citation intensity and knowledge flow. Comparison with analogous results for the citation dynamics of technology-disaggregated cohorts of patents provides deeper insight into the basic principles of information propagation as indicated by citing behavior.Comment: 13 pages, 6 figures, Elsevier style, v2: revised version to appear in J. Informetric

A review of the characteristics of 108 author-level bibliometric indicators

An increasing demand for bibliometric assessment of individuals has led to a growth of new bibliometric indicators as well as new variants or combinations of established ones. The aim of this review is to contribute with objective facts about the usefulness of bibliometric indicators of the effects of publication activity at the individual level. This paper reviews 108 indicators that can potentially be used to measure performance on the individual author level, and examines the complexity of their calculations in relation to what they are supposed to reflect and ease of end-user application.Comment: to be published in Scientometrics, 201