Computer Science – Digital Libraries
Scientific paper
2010-04-20
Computer Science
Digital Libraries
Scientific paper
Impact factors (and similar measures such as the Scimago Journal Rankings) suffer from two problems: (i) citation behavior varies among fields of science and therefore leads to systematic differences, and (ii) there are no statistics to inform us whether differences are significant. The recently introduced SNIP indicator of Scopus tries to remedy the first of these two problems, but a number of normalization decisions are involved which makes it impossible to test for significance. Using fractional counting of citations-based on the assumption that impact is proportionate to the number of references in the citing documents-citations can be contextualized at the paper level and aggregated impacts of sets can be tested for their significance. It can be shown that the weighted impact of Annals of Mathematics (0.247) is not so much lower than that of Molecular Cell (0.386) despite a five-fold difference between their impact factors (2.793 and 13.156, respectively).
Leydesdorff Loet
Opthof Tobias
No associations
LandOfFree
Scopus's Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) versus a Journal Impact Factor based on Fractional Counting of Citations does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this scientific paper.
If you have personal experience with Scopus's Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) versus a Journal Impact Factor based on Fractional Counting of Citations, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Scopus's Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) versus a Journal Impact Factor based on Fractional Counting of Citations will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFWR-SCP-O-325714