Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorThelwall, Mike
dc.date.accessioned2017-09-19T13:52:15Z
dc.date.available2017-09-19T13:52:15Z
dc.date.issued2017-10-24
dc.identifier.citationThelwall, M. (2017) Confidence intervals for normalised citation counts: Can they delimit underlying research capability? Journal of Informetrics 11 (4), pp. 1069-1079. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.09.002en
dc.identifier.issn1751-1577en
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.joi.2017.09.002
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2436/620668
dc.descriptionThis is an accepted manuscript of an article published by Elsevier in Journal of Informetrics on 24/10/2017, available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.09.002 The accepted version of the publication may differ from the final published version.en
dc.description.abstractNormalised citation counts are routinely used to assess the average impact of research groups or nations. There is controversy over whether confidence intervals for them are theoretically valid or practically useful. In response, this article introduces the concept of a group’s underlying research capability to produce impactful research. It then investigates whether confidence intervals could delimit the underlying capability of a group in practice. From 123120 confidence interval comparisons for the average citation impact of the national outputs of ten countries within 36 individual large monodisciplinary journals, moderately fewer than 95% of subsequent indicator values fall within 95% confidence intervals from prior years, with the percentage declining over time. This is consistent with confidence intervals effectively delimiting the research capability of a group, although it does not prove that this is the cause of the results. The results are unaffected by whether internationally collaborative articles are included.
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherElsevieren
dc.relation.urlhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/17511577/11?sdc=1en
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subjectCitation analysisen
dc.subjectconfidence intervalsen
dc.subjectresearch capacityen
dc.subjectresearch capabilityen
dc.titleConfidence intervals for normalised citation counts: Can they delimit underlying research capability?en
dc.typeJournal article
dc.identifier.journalJournal of Informetricsen
dc.date.accepted2017-09-11
rioxxterms.funderJiscen
rioxxterms.identifier.projectUoW190917MTen
rioxxterms.versionAMen
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttps://creativecommons.org/CC BY-NC-ND 4.0en
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2018-10-24en
dc.source.volume11
dc.source.issue4
dc.source.beginpage1069
dc.source.endpage1079
refterms.dateFCD2018-10-27T11:02:45Z
refterms.versionFCDAM
refterms.dateFOA2010-10-24T00:00:00Z
html.description.abstractNormalised citation counts are routinely used to assess the average impact of research groups or nations. There is controversy over whether confidence intervals for them are theoretically valid or practically useful. In response, this article introduces the concept of a group’s underlying research capability to produce impactful research. It then investigates whether confidence intervals could delimit the underlying capability of a group in practice. From 123120 confidence interval comparisons for the average citation impact of the national outputs of ten countries within 36 individual large monodisciplinary journals, moderately fewer than 95% of subsequent indicator values fall within 95% confidence intervals from prior years, with the percentage declining over time. This is consistent with confidence intervals effectively delimiting the research capability of a group, although it does not prove that this is the cause of the results. The results are unaffected by whether internationally collaborative articles are included.


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Publisher version
Thumbnail
Name:
Big Journals CI for MNLCS ...
Size:
926.8Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/