Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

A priori vs. a posteriori normalisation of citation indicators. The case of journal ranking

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

Two paradigmatic approaches to the normalisation of citation-impact measures are discussed. The results of the mathematical manipulation of standard indicators such as citation means, notably journal Impact Factors, (called a posteriori normalisation) are compared with citation measures obtained from fractional citation counting (called a priori normalisation). The distributions of two subfields of the life sciences and mathematics are chosen for the analysis. It is shown that both methods provide indicators that are useful tools for the comparative assessment of journal citation impact.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Asai, I. (1981). Adjusted age distribution and its application to impact factor and immediacy index. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 32, 172–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beirlant, J., Glänzel, W., Carbonez, A., & Leemans, H. (2007). Scoring research output using statistical quantile plotting. Journal of Informetrics, 1(3), 185–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergstrom, C. T., West, J. D., & Wiseman, M. A. (2008). The eigenfactor (TM) metrics. Journal of Neuroscience, 28(45), 11433–11434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braun, T., & Glänzel, W. (1990). United Germany: The new scientific superpower? Scientometrics, 19(5–6), 513–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, L., & Visser, M. S. (2006). Extending citation analysis to non-source items. Scientometrics, 66(2), 327–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W. (2009). The multi-dimensionality of journal impact. Scientometrics, 78(2), 355–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W. (2011). The application of Characteristic Scores and Scales to the evaluation and ranking of scientific journals. Journal of Information Science. doi:10.1177/0165551510392316.

  • Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (1988). Characteristic scores and scales in assessing citation impact. Journal of Information Science, 14(2), 123–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2003). A new classification scheme of science fields and subfields designed for scientometric evaluation purposes. Scientometrics, 56(3), 357–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W., Schubert, A., Thijs, B., & Debackere, K. (2009). Subfield-specific normalized relative indicators and a new generation of relational charts: Methodological foundations illustrated on the assessment of institutional research performance. Scientometrics, 78(1), 165–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez-Pereira, B., Guerrero-Bote, V. P., & Moya-Anegon, F. (2010). A new approach to the metric of journals’ scientific prestige: The SJR indicator. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 379–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., & Opthof, T. (2010). Scopus’s source normalized impact per paper (SNIP) versus a journal impact factor based on fractional counting of citations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. doi:10.1002/asi.21371.

  • Lindsey, D. (1978). Corrected quality ratio: A composite index of scientific contribution to knowledge. Social Studies of Science, 8, 349–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, N., Guan, J., & Zhao, Y. (2008). Bringing PageRank to the citation analysis. Information Processing & Management, 44(2), 800–810.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H. F. (2010). Measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 265–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H. F., de Bruin, R. E., & van Leeuwen, Th. N. (1995). New bibliometric tools for the assessment of national research performance: Database description, overview of indicators and first applications. Scientometrics, 33(3), 381–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinski, G., & Narin, F. (1976). Citation influence for journal aggregates of scientific publications. Information Processing and Management, 12, 297–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price, D. J., & de Solla, (1970). Citation measures of hard science, soft science, technology, and non-science. In C. E. Nelson & D. K. Pollak (Eds.), Communication among scientists and engineers (pp. 1–12). Lexington, MA: Heat.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schubert, A., & Braun, T. (1986). Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative-assessment of publication output and citation impact. Scientometrics, 9(5–6), 281–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schubert, A., & Braun, T. (1996). Cross-field normalization of scientometric indicators. Scientometrics, 36(3), 311–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomer, C. (1986). A statistical assessment of two measures of citation: the impact factor and the immediacy index. Information Processing and Management, 22, 251–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waltman, L., & van Eck, N. J. (2010). A general source normalized approach to bibliometric research performance assessment. In 11th International conference on science and technology indicators, Leiden, the Netherlands, 9–11 September 2010, Book of Abstracts (pp. 298–299).

  • Zitt, M. (2010a). Citing-side normalization of journal impact: A robust variant of the Audience Factor. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 392–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zitt, M. (2010b). Behind citing-side normalization of citations: The determinants of the Journal Impact Factor across fields. In 11th International conference on science and technology indicators, Leiden, the Netherlands, 9–11 September 2010, Book of Abstracts (pp. 312–313).

  • Zitt, M., & Small, H. (2008). Modifying the journal impact factor by fractional citation weighting: The audience factor. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(11), 1856–1860.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for R&D Monitoring and Department of MSI, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Wolfgang Glänzel, Bart Thijs & Koenraad Debackere

  2. Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Institute for Research Policy Studies, Budapest, Hungary

    Wolfgang Glänzel & András Schubert

Authors
  1. Wolfgang Glänzel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. András Schubert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bart Thijs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  4. Koenraad Debackere
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wolfgang Glänzel.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Glänzel, W., Schubert, A., Thijs, B. et al. A priori vs. a posteriori normalisation of citation indicators. The case of journal ranking. Scientometrics 87, 415–424 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0345-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0345-6

Keywords