Abstract
This paper presents an overview of research assessment methodologies developed in the field of evaluative bibliometrics, a subfield of quantitative science and technology studies, aimed to construct indicators of research performance from a quantitative statistical analysis of scientific-scholarly documents. Citation analysis is one of its key methodologies. The paper illustrates the potentialities and limitations of the use of bibliometric indicators in research assessment. It discusses the relationship between metrics and peer review; databases used as sources of bibliometric analysis; the pros and cons of indicators often applied, including journal impact factors, Hirsch indices, and normalized indicators of citation impact; and approaches to the bibliometric measurement of institutional research performance.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Braun T, Glänzel W, Schubert A (1988) World flash on basic research — the newest version of the facts and figures on publication output and relative citation impact of 100 countries 1981-985. Scientometrics 13:181-88
Garfield E (1964) “The Citation Index” — A new dimension in indexing. Science 144: 649-54
Garfield E (1972) Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation. Science 178: 471-79
Garfield E (1979) Citation Indexing. Its theory and application in science, technology and humanities. Wiley , New York
Garfield E (1996) How can impact factors be improved?. BMJ 313: 411-13
Hirsch JE (2005) An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102: 16569-6572
López-Illescas C, De Moya-Anegón, Moed HF (2009a) Coverage and citation impact of oncological journals in the Web of Science and Scopus. J Informetrics (in press). Available online via: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2008.08.001
López-Illescas C, De Moya-Anegón, Moed HF (2009b) Comparing bibliometric country-by-country rankings derived from the Web of Science and Scopus: The effect of poorly cited journals in oncology. J Inf Sci (in press).
Moed HF (2005) Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht
Moed HF, de Bruin RE, van Leeuwen TN (1995) New bibliometric tools for the assessment of national research performance: database description, overview of indicators and first applications. Scientometrics 33: 381-42
Moed HF, van Leeuwen TN (1996) Impact factors can mislead. Nature 381: 186
Moed HF, Visser MS (2008) Appraisal of citation Data sources. A report on a study within the Framework Agreement for the development of a new research assessment and funding system, commissioned by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE). Available via: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/Pubs/rdreports/2008/rd17_08/
Narin F (1976) Evaluative bibliometrics: The use of publication and citation analysis in the evaluation of scientific activity. National Science Foundation, Washington D.C.
Reedijk J, Moed HF (2008) Is the impact of journal impact factors decreasing?. J. Document 64: 183-92
Seglen PO (1994) Causal relationship between article citedness and journal impact. J Am Soc Inf Sci 45: 1-1
Van Raan AFJ (2004) Measuring Science. In: Moed HF, Glänzel W, Schmoch U (eds) Handbook of quantitative science and technology research. The use of publication and patent statistics in studies of S&T systems. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 19-0
Vinkler P (1986) Evaluations of some methods for the relative assessment of scientific publications. Scientometrics 10: 157-78
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
About this article
Cite this article
Moed, H.F. New developments in the use of citation analysis in research evaluation. Arch. Immunol. Ther. Exp. 57, 13–18 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00005-009-0001-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00005-009-0001-5