Abstract
A framework is proposed for comparing different types of bibliometric indicators, introducing the notion of an Indicator Comparison Report. It provides a comprehensive overview of the main differences and similarities of indicators. The comparison shows both the strong points and the limitations of each of the indicators at stake, rather than over-promoting one indicator and ignoring the benefits of alternative constructs. It focuses on base notions, assumptions, and application contexts, which makes it more intelligible to non-experts. As an illustration, a comparison report is presented for the original and the modified source normalized impact per paper indicator of journal citation impact (SNIP).
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 51-65 |
| Number of pages | 15 |
| Journal | Scientometrics |
| Volume | 106 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 1 Jan 2016 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Keywords
- Bibliometric indicators
- Indicator development
- Journal impact factor
- Relative indicators
- SNIP
- Source normalization
- Statistical validity
- Subject field bias