Quantitative evaluation of alternative field normalization procedures
作者：
Highlights：
• We test the performance of six cited-side normalization procedures.
• We use six datasets from 1980–2004,172 sub-fields, and variable citation windows.
• The shapes of sub-field citation distributions are strikingly similar.
• Differences in citation practices represent 13% of total citation inequality.
• A two-parameter normalization scheme outperforms the rest.
摘要
•We test the performance of six cited-side normalization procedures.•We use six datasets from 1980–2004,172 sub-fields, and variable citation windows.•The shapes of sub-field citation distributions are strikingly similar.•Differences in citation practices represent 13% of total citation inequality.•A two-parameter normalization scheme outperforms the rest.
论文关键词：IDCP,citation Inequality due to Differences in Citation Practices,Citation analysis,Citation practices,Normalization procedures,Citation inequality
论文评审过程：Received 18 April 2013, Revised 7 June 2013, Accepted 11 June 2013, Available online 12 July 2013.
论文官网地址：https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.06.001
