View More View Less
  • 1 CSIR National Institute of Science Communication and Information Resources, New Delhi 110 012, India
Restricted access

Abstract

Quantitative assessment of information production processes requires the definition of a robust citation performance indicator. This is particularly so where there is a need to introduce a normalization mechanism for correcting for quality across field and disciplines. In this paper, we offer insights from the “thermodynamic” approach in terms of quality, quantity and quasity and energy, exergy and entropy to show how the recently introduced expected value measure can be rationalized and improved. The normalized energy indicator E is proposed as a suitable single number scalar indicator of a scientist's or group's performance (i.e. as a multiplicative product of quality and quantity), when complete bibliometric information is available.

  • Bornmann, L 2010 Towards an ideal method of measuring research performance: Some comments to the Opthof and Leydesdorff (2010) paper. Journal of Informetrics 4 3 441443 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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 228230 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bornmann, L F de Moya-Anegón Leydesdorff, L 2010 Do scientific advancements lean on the shoulders of giants? A bibliometric investigation of the Ortega hypothesis. PLoS One 5 10 e11344 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Campbell, D., Archambault, E., & Co∘te’, G., (2008). Benchmarking of Canadian Genomics1996-2007. http://www.science-metrix.com/pdf/SM_Benchmarking_Genomics_Canada.pdf.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gingras, Y, Lariviere, V 2011 There are neither “king” nor “crown” in scientometrics: Comments on a supposed “alternative” method of normalization. Journal of Informetrics 5 1 226227 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Leydesdorff, L., & Bornmann, L. (2011). Integrated impact indicators (I3) compared with Impact Factors (IFs): An alternative design with policy implications. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. doi: .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Leydesdorff, L, Opthof, T 2010 Normalization at the field level: Fractional counting of citations. Journal of Informetrics 4 4 644646 .

  • Leydesdorff, L, Opthof, T 2011 Remaining problems with the “new crown indicator” (MNCS) of the CWTS. Journal of Informetrics 5 1 224225 .

  • Leydesdorff, L, Bornmann, L, Mutz, R, Opthof, T 2011 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 13701381 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lundberg, J 2007 Lifting the crown—citation z-score. Journal of Informetrics 1 2 145154 .

  • Moed, HF 2010 CWTS crown indicator measures citation impact of a research group's publication oeuvre. Journal of Informetrics 4 3 436438 .

  • National Science Board. (2010). Science and engineering indicators 2010, appendix tables. Arlington, VA, USA: National Science Foundation (NSB 10-01).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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 423430 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Prathap, G 2011 The Energy–Exergy–Entropy (or EEE) sequences in bibliometric assessment. Scientometrics 87:515524 .

  • Prathap, G 2011 Quasity, when quantity has a quality all of its own—toward a theory of performance. Scientometrics 88:555562 .

  • Rehn, C., & Kronman, U. (2008). Bibliometric handbook for Karolinska Institutet. http://ki.se/content/1/c6/01/79/31/bibliometric_handbook_karolinska_institutet_v_1.05.pdf.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Schubert, A, Braun, T 1986 Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact. Scientometrics 9 5 281291 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Spaan, JAE 2010 The danger of pseudoscience in Informetrics. Journal of Informetrics 4 3 439440 .

  • AFJ Van Raan TN Van Leeuwen Visser, MS NJ Van Eck Waltman, L 2010 Rivals for the crown: Reply to Opthof and Leydesdorff. Journal of Informetrics 4 3 431435 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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, doi: .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Waltman, L NJ Van Eck TN Van Leeuwen Visser, MS AFJ Van Raan 2011 Towards a new crown indicator: Some theoretical considerations. Journal of Informetrics 5 1 3747 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation