Bibliography

Aksnes, D. W., Schneider, J. W., & Gunnarsson, M. (2012). Ranking national research systems by citation indicators. A comparative analysis using whole and fractionalised counting methods. Journal of Informetrics, 6(1), 36–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2011.08.002

Baeza-Yates, R., & Ribeiro-Neto, B. (2011). Modern information retrieval: The concepts and technology behind search (2nd ed.). Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Bailón-Moreno, R., Jurado-Alameda, E., Ruiz-Baños, R., & Courtial, J. P. (2005). Bibliometric laws: Empirical flaws of fit. Scientometrics, 63(2), 209–229. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0211-5

Bar-Ilan, J. (2008). Which h-index? — A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics, 74(2), 257–271. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-0216-y

Blondel, V. D., Guillaume, J.-L., Lambiotte, R., & Lefebvre, E. (2008). Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2008(10), P10008. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/2008/10/P10008

Bornmann, L. (2007). How can citation impact in bibliometrics be normalized? A new approach combining citing-side normalization and citation percentiles. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(4), 1553–1569. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00089

Bornmann, L. (2020). An evaluation of percentile measures of citation impact, and a proposal for making them better. Scientometrics, 124(2), 1457–1478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03512-7

Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H.-D. (2007). What do we know about the h index? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(9), 1381–1385. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20609

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), 228–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.10.009

Bornmann, L., & Williams, R. (2020). An evaluation of percentile measures of citation impact, and a proposal for making them better. Scientometrics, 124(2), 1457–1478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03512-7

Bornmann, L., Haunschild, R., & Mutz, R. (2020). Should citations be field-normalized in evaluative bibliometrics? An empirical analysis based on propensity score matching. Journal of Informetrics, 14(4), 101098. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2020.101098

Bradford, S. C. (1934). Sources of information on specific subjects. Engineering, 26(4), 85–86.

Campanario, J. M. (2011). Empirical study of journal impact factors obtained using the classical two-year citation window versus a five-year citation window. Scientometrics, 87(1), 189–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0334-1

Clauset, A., Newman, M. E. J., & Moore, C. (2004). Finding community structure in very large networks. Physical Review E, 70(6), 066111. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.70.066111

Cleverdon, C. W. (1972). On the inverse relationship of recall and precision. Journal of Documentation, 28(3), 195–201. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb026538

Cronin, B. (2001). Hyperauthorship: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52(7), 558–569. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.1097

Daniel, B. Klein, & Chiang, E. (2004). The social science citation index: A black box—with an ideological bias? Econ Journal Watch, 1(1), 134–165.

Daraio, C., Lenzerini, M., Leporelli, C., Naggar, P., Bonaccorsi, A., & Bartolucci, A. (2016). The advantages of an ontology-based data management approach: Openness, interoperability and data quality. Scientometrics, 108(1), 441–455. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1913-6

Donner, P. (2018). Effect of publication month on citation impact. Journal of Informetrics, 12(1), 330–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.01.012

Donner, P. (2024). Remarks on modified fractional counting. Journal of Informetrics, 18(4), 101585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2024.101585

Donner, P., Rimmert, C., & Van Eck, N. J. (2020). Comparing institutional-level bibliometric research performance indicator values based on different affiliation disambiguation systems. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(1), 150–170. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00013

Egghe, L. (2010). The Hirsch index and related impact measures. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 44(1), 65–114. https://doi.org/10.1002/aris.2010.1440440109

Egghe, L. (2012). Averages of ratios compared to ratios of averages: Mathematical results. Journal of Informetrics, 6(2), 307–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2011.12.007

Egghe, L., & Rousseau, R. (1996). Average and global impact of a set of journals. Scientometrics, 36(1), 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02126648

El Gibari, S., Gómez, T., & Ruiz, F. (2022). Combining reference point based composite indicators with data envelopment analysis: Application to the assessment of universities. Scientometrics, 127(8), 4363–4395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04436-0

Gauffriau, M., Larsen, P. O., Maye, I., Roulin-Perriard, A., & Von Ins, M. (2008). Comparisons of results of publication counting using different methods. Scientometrics, 77(1), 147–176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1934-2

Glänzel, W. (2004). Towards a model for diachronous and synchronous citation analyses. Scientometrics, 60(3), 511–522. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000034391.06240.2a

Glänzel, W., & Czerwon, H. J. (1996). A new methodological approach to bibliographic coupling and its application to the national, regional and institutional level. Scientometrics, 37(2), 195–221. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02093621

Glänzel, W., Schlemmer, B., & Thijs, B. (2003). Better late than never? On the chance to become highly cited only beyond the standard bibliometric time horizon. Scientometrics, 58(3), 571–586. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000006881.30700.ea

Glänzel, W., & Thijs, B. (2012). Using ‘core documents’ for detecting and labelling new emerging topics. Scientometrics, 91(2), 399–416. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0591-7

Harzing, A.-W., & Alakangas, S. (2016). Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: A longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics, 106(2), 787–804. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1798-9

Heintz, B. (2010). Numerische Differenz. Überlegungen zu einer Soziologie des (quantitativen) Vergleichs / Numerical difference. Toward a sociology of (quantitative) comparisons. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 39(3), 162–181. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfsoz-2010-0301

Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L., de Rijcke, S., & Rafols, I. (2015). Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for Research Metrics. Nature, 520(7548), 429–431. https://doi.org/10.1038/520429a

Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(46), 16569–16572. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102

Jarneving, B. (2005). A comparison of two bibliometric methods for mapping of the research front. Scientometrics, 65(2), 245–263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0270-7

Johnes, J. (2018). University rankings: What do they really show? Scientometrics, 115(1), 585–606. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2666-1

Kessler, M. M. (1963). Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers. American Documentation, 14(1), 10–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.5090140103

Kessler, M. M. (1963). Bibliographic coupling extended in time: Ten case histories. Information Storage and Retrieval, 1(4), 169–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-0271(63)90016-0

Larivière, V., & Gingras, Y. (2011). Averages of ratios vs. ratios of averages: An empirical analysis of four levels of aggregation. Journal of Informetrics, 5(3), 392–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2011.02.001

Larsen, P. O., & Von Ins, M. (2010). The rate of growth in scientific publication and the decline in coverage provided by Science Citation Index. Scientometrics, 84(3), 575–603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0202-z

Leydesdorff, L., & Opthof, T. (2010). Normalization at the field level: Fractional counting of citations. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1006.2896

Luke, D. A. (2015). A user’s guide to network analysis in R. Use R! Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23883-8

Makkonen, T., & Van Der Have, R. P. (2013). Benchmarking regional innovative performance: Composite measures and direct innovation counts. Scientometrics, 94(1), 247–262. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0753-2

Manning, C. D., Raghavan, P., & Schütze, H. (2009). Introduction to information retrieval. Cambridge University Press. https://nlp.stanford.edu/IR-book/pdf/irbookonlinereading.pdf

Merton, R. K. (1968). The Matthew effect in science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered. Science, 159(3810), 56–63. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.159.3810.56

Moed, H. F. (2010). Measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 265–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.01.002

Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106(1), 213–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5

Moon, H. S., & Lee, J. D. (2005). A fuzzy set theory approach to national composite S&T indices. Scientometrics, 64(1), 67–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0238-7

Müller, M. C., Reitz, F., & Roy, N. (2017). Data sets for author name disambiguation: An empirical analysis and a new resource. Scientometrics, 111(3), 1467–1500. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2363-5

Mutschke, P., & Mayr, P. (2015). Science models for search: A study on combining scholarly information retrieval and scientometrics. Scientometrics, 102(3), 2323–2345. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1485-2

Nasir, A., Ali, T. M., Shahdin, S., & Rahman, T. U. (2011). Technology achievement index 2009: Ranking and comparative study of nations. Scientometrics, 87(1), 41–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0285-6

Nicolaisen, J., & Hjørland, B. (2007). Practical potentials of Bradford’s law: A critical examination of the received view. Journal of Documentation, 63(3), 359–377. https://doi.org/10.1108/00220410710743298

OECD/European Union/EC-JRC. (2008). Handbook on constructing composite indicators: Methodology and user guide. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264043466-en

Powers, D. M. W. (2008). Evaluation: From precision, recall and F-Measure to ROC, informedness, markedness and correlation. Mach. Learn. Technol., 2. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2010.16061

Pudovkin, A. I., & Garfield, E. (2009). Percentile rank and author superiority indexes for evaluating individual journal articles and the author’s overall citation performance. Collnet Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 3(2), 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/09737766.2009.10700871

Rimmert, C., Schwechheimer, H., & Winterhager, M. (2017). Disambiguation of author addresses in bibliometric databases - technical report. Bielefeld: Universität Bielefeld, Institute for Interdisciplinary Studies of Science (I²SoS).

Shenton, A. K., & Hay-Gibson, N. V. (2011). Bradford’s Law and its relevance to researchers. Education for Information, 27(4), 217–230. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-2009-0882

Sivertsen, G., Rousseau, R., & Zhang, L. (2019). Measuring scientific contributions with modified fractional counting. Journal of Informetrics, 13(2), 679–694. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2019.03.010

Small, H. (1973). Co‐citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 24(4), 265–269. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630240406

Stahlschmidt, S., & Stephen, D. (2020). Comparison of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions databases. Berlin: Deutsches Zentrum für Hochschul- und Wissenschaftsforschung. https://bibliometrie.info/downloads/DZHW-Comparison-DIM-SCP-WOS.PDF

Tang, L., & Walsh, J. P. (2010). Bibliometric fingerprints: Name disambiguation based on approximate structure equivalence of cognitive maps. Scientometrics, 84(3), 763–784. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0196-6

Tijssen, R. J. W., Visser, M. S., & Van Leeuwen, T. N. (2002). Benchmarking international scientific excellence: Are highly cited research papers an appropriate frame of reference? Scientometrics, 54(3), 381–397. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016082432660

Traag, V. A., Waltman, L., & Van Eck, N. J. (2019). From Louvain to Leiden: Guaranteeing well-connected communities. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 5233. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-41695-z

Traag, V. A., & Šubelj, L. (2023). Large network community detection by fast label propagation. Scientific Reports, 13(1), 2701. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-29610-z

Van Raan, A. F. J. (2006). Comparison of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judgment for 147 chemistry research groups. Scientometrics, 67(3), 491–502. https://doi.org/10.1556/Scient.67.2006.3.10

Vinkler, P. (2006). Composite scientometric indicators for evaluating publications of research institutes. Scientometrics, 68(3), 629–642. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0123-z

Waltman, L., & Van Eck, N. J. (2015). Field-normalized citation impact indicators and the choice of an appropriate counting method. Journal of Informetrics, 9(4), 872–894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2015.08.001

Wang, J. (2013). Citation time window choice for research impact evaluation. Scientometrics, 94(3), 851–872. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0775-9

Weinberg, B. H. (1974). Bibliographic coupling: A review. Information Storage and Retrieval, 10(5–6), 189–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-0271(74)90058-8

White, H. D., & Griffith, B. C. (1981). Author cocitation: A literature measure of intellectual structure. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 32(3), 163–171. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630320302

Zhao, D., & Strotmann, A. (2008). Evolution of research activities and intellectual influences in information science 1996–2005: Introducing author bibliographic‐coupling analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(13), 2070–2086. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20910