IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v21y2012i1p61-70.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Redefining the field of economics: Improving field normalization for the application of bibliometric techniques in the field of economics

Author

Listed:
  • Thed N. van Leeuwen
  • Clara Calero Medina

Abstract

Field normalization, and its effect of bibliometric indicators, is a widely discussed topic among bibliometricians. It is not the necessity of field normalization around which the debate evolves, but how to field normalize bibliometric indicators. In this article we present the results of a study in which publication data of a large disciplinary database in economics (EconLit) is combined with the multidisciplinary citation indexes produced by Thomson Reuters. The main purpose of the study is to investigate whether it would be possible to combine the classification scheme of the economics database with the advantages of the citation indexes (both multiple addresses and citation data), in order to improve the possible applicability of the citation indexes in research performance studies in the field of economics and its periphery. The authors show the starting points of both databases, the outcome of the matching and combining of both sets of publications, and the effects of EconLit field classification in terms of differences in impact levels. The study clearly shows that research performance exercises conducted in the field of economics would benefit from the labeling of publications in the citation indexes with a more detailed classification scheme as found in EconLit. Copyright The Author 2012. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Thed N. van Leeuwen & Clara Calero Medina, 2012. "Redefining the field of economics: Improving field normalization for the application of bibliometric techniques in the field of economics," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(1), pages 61-70, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:21:y:2012:i:1:p:61-70
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvr006
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jan Wiers & Didier Chabaud, 2022. "Bibliometric analysis of immigrant entrepreneurship research 2009–2019," Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, Springer;UNESCO Chair in Entrepreneurship, vol. 12(1), pages 441-464, December.
    2. Lutz Bornmann & Klaus Wohlrabe, 2019. "Normalisation of citation impact in economics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(2), pages 841-884, August.
    3. Perianes-Rodriguez, Antonio & Ruiz-Castillo, Javier, 2017. "A comparison of the Web of Science and publication-level classification systems of science," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 32-45.
    4. Dunaiski, Marcel & Geldenhuys, Jaco & Visser, Willem, 2019. "Globalised vs averaged: Bias and ranking performance on the author level," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 299-313.
    5. Ahlgren, Per & Waltman, Ludo, 2014. "The correlation between citation-based and expert-based assessments of publication channels: SNIP and SJR vs. Norwegian quality assessments," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 985-996.
    6. Cristian Colliander & Per Ahlgren, 2019. "Comparison of publication-level approaches to ex-post citation normalization," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(1), pages 283-300, July.
    7. Guillermo Armando Ronda-Pupo, 2020. "The performance of Latin American research on economics & business," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 573-590, January.
    8. Ludo Waltman & Nees Jan Eck, 2013. "Source normalized indicators of citation impact: an overview of different approaches and an empirical comparison," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(3), pages 699-716, September.
    9. Waltman, Ludo, 2016. "A review of the literature on citation impact indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 365-391.
    10. Bornmann, Lutz & Marx, Werner, 2013. "The proposal of a broadening of perspective in evaluative bibliometrics by complementing the times cited with a cited reference analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 84-88.
    11. Rahman, A.I.M. Jakaria & Guns, Raf & Rousseau, Ronald & Engels, Tim C.E., 2015. "Is the expertise of evaluation panels congruent with the research interests of the research groups: A quantitative approach based on barycenters," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 704-721.
    12. Ruiz-Castillo, Javier & Waltman, Ludo, 2015. "Field-normalized citation impact indicators using algorithmically constructed classification systems of science," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 102-117.
    13. Nauman Majeed & Sulaiman Ainin, 2021. "Visualizing the evolution and landscape of socio-economic impact research," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 55(2), pages 637-659, April.
    14. Michael Thelwall, 2018. "Can Microsoft Academic be used for citation analysis of preprint archives? The case of the Social Science Research Network," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(2), pages 913-928, May.
    15. Daniel S. Hamermesh, 2018. "Citations in Economics: Measurement, Uses, and Impacts," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 56(1), pages 115-156, March.
    16. Lutz Bornmann & Werner Marx & Andreas Barth, 2013. "The Normalization of Citation Counts Based on Classification Systems," Publications, MDPI, vol. 1(2), pages 1-9, August.
    17. Thed Leeuwen, 2012. "Discussing some basic critique on Journal Impact Factors: revision of earlier comments," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(2), pages 443-455, August.
    18. Rons, Nadine, 2018. "Bibliometric approximation of a scientific specialty by combining key sources, title words, authors and references," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 113-132.
    19. Dunaiski, Marcel & Geldenhuys, Jaco & Visser, Willem, 2019. "On the interplay between normalisation, bias, and performance of paper impact metrics," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 270-290.
    20. Leydesdorff, Loet & Bornmann, Lutz & Zhou, Ping, 2016. "Construction of a pragmatic base line for journal classifications and maps based on aggregated journal-journal citation relations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 902-918.
    21. Vaccario, Giacomo & Medo, Matúš & Wider, Nicolas & Mariani, Manuel Sebastian, 2017. "Quantifying and suppressing ranking bias in a large citation network," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 766-782.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:21:y:2012:i:1:p:61-70. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.