Average-based versus high-and low-impact indicators for the evaluation of scientific distributions
AbstractAlbarran et al. (2011a) introduced a novel methodology for the evaluation of citation distributions consisting of a pair of high- and a low-impact measures defined over the set of articles with citations below or above a critical citation level CCL. Albarran et al. (2011b) presented the first empirical applications to a situation in which the world citation distribution in 22 scientific fields is partitioned into three geographical areas: the U.S., the European Union, and the rest of the world. In this paper, we compare our results with those obtained with average-based indicators. For reasonable CCLs, such as the 80th percentile of the world citation distribution in each field, the cardinal differences between the results obtained with our high-impact index and the mean citation rate are of a large order of magnitude. When, in addition, the percentage in the top 5% of most cited articles or the percentage of uncited articles are used, there are still important quantitative differences with respect to the high- and low-impact indicators advocated in our approach when the CCL is fixed at the 80th or the 95th percentile.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Universidad Carlos III, Departamento de Economía in its series Economics Working Papers with number we1040.
Date of creation: Dec 2010
Date of revision:
Other versions of this item:
- Pedro Albarr�n & Ignacio Ortu�o & Javier Ruiz-Castillo, 2011. "Average-based versus high- and low-impact indicators for the evaluation of scientific distributions," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(4), pages 325-339, October.
- Albarrán, Pedro & Ortuño-Ortín, Ignacio & Ruiz-Castillo, Javier, 2010. "Average-based versus High- and Low-Impact Indicators for the Evaluation of Scientific Distributions," CEPR Discussion Papers 7887, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions
- I32 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Measurement and Analysis of Poverty
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Pedro Albarran & Ignacio Ortuno & Javier Ruiz-Castillo, 2009. "The measurement of low- and high-impact in citation distributions: technical results," Economics Working Papers we095735, Universidad Carlos III, Departamento de Economía.
- Pedro Albarrán & Juan A. Crespo & Ignacio Ortuño & Javier Ruiz-Castillo, 2010.
"The skewness of science in 219 sub-fields and a number of aggregates,"
Economics Working Papers
we1038, Universidad Carlos III, Departamento de Economía.
- Pedro Albarrán & Juan A. Crespo & Ignacio Ortuño & Javier Ruiz-Castillo, 2011. "The skewness of science in 219 sub-fields and a number of aggregates," Economics Working Papers we1109, Universidad Carlos III, Departamento de Economía.
- Albarrán, Pedro & Crespo, Juan A. & Ortuño-Ortín, Ignacio & Ruiz-Castillo, Javier, 2010. "The Skewness of Science in 219 Sub-Fields and a Number of Aggregates," CEPR Discussion Papers 8126, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ().
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.