%0 Journal Article %1 kaur2013universality %A Kaur, Jasleen %A Radicchi, Filippo %A Menczer, Filippo %D 2013 %J Journal of Informetrics %K analysis citation impact scientometrics %N 4 %P 924--932 %R 10.1016/j.joi.2013.09.002 %T Universality of scholarly impact metrics %U http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157713000746 %V 7 %X Abstract Given the growing use of impact metrics in the evaluation of scholars, journals, academic institutions, and even countries, there is a critical need for means to compare scientific impact across disciplinary boundaries. Unfortunately, citation-based metrics are strongly biased by diverse field sizes and publication and citation practices. As a result, we have witnessed an explosion in the number of newly proposed metrics that claim to be “universal.” However, there is currently no way to objectively assess whether a normalized metric can actually compensate for disciplinary bias. We introduce a new method to assess the universality of any scholarly impact metric, and apply it to evaluate a number of established metrics. We also define a very simple new metric hs, which proves to be universal, thus allowing to compare the impact of scholars across scientific disciplines. These results move us closer to a formal methodology in the measure of scholarly impact.

@article{kaur2013universality, abstract = {Abstract Given the growing use of impact metrics in the evaluation of scholars, journals, academic institutions, and even countries, there is a critical need for means to compare scientific impact across disciplinary boundaries. Unfortunately, citation-based metrics are strongly biased by diverse field sizes and publication and citation practices. As a result, we have witnessed an explosion in the number of newly proposed metrics that claim to be “universal.” However, there is currently no way to objectively assess whether a normalized metric can actually compensate for disciplinary bias. We introduce a new method to assess the universality of any scholarly impact metric, and apply it to evaluate a number of established metrics. We also define a very simple new metric hs, which proves to be universal, thus allowing to compare the impact of scholars across scientific disciplines. These results move us closer to a formal methodology in the measure of scholarly impact. }, added-at = {2013-11-07T09:25:31.000+0100}, author = {Kaur, Jasleen and Radicchi, Filippo and Menczer, Filippo}, biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2878a9ef9fbce27d44addc4082b2c3df4/jaeschke}, doi = {10.1016/j.joi.2013.09.002}, interhash = {edbcf37f30ef3189ccf47414f0227489}, intrahash = {878a9ef9fbce27d44addc4082b2c3df4}, issn = {1751-1577}, journal = {Journal of Informetrics }, keywords = {analysis citation impact scientometrics}, number = 4, pages = {924--932}, timestamp = {2014-07-28T15:57:31.000+0200}, title = {Universality of scholarly impact metrics }, url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157713000746}, volume = 7, year = 2013 }