IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v126y2021i6d10.1007_s11192-021-03964-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis of the new scopus CiteScore

Author

Listed:
  • Hui Fang

    (Nanjing University)

Abstract

This study analyzes the new version of CiteScore. Because the formula used to calculate the new CiteScore contains more items representing early citations, it has a bias in favor of journals that have high proportion of early citations within 4 years after publication. Similarly, the formula to calculate the CiteScore of year Y contains more items representing the citations received by eligible documents (EDs) published by a journal in Y − 3. Therefore, new CiteScore of year Y is more affected by the impact of the EDs published in Y − 3 than by the impact of the EDs published in Y − 2, than in Y − 1, and than in Y. Moreover, the impact of the EDs published in Y − 3 more heavily influences the CiteScore of Y than the traditional JIF of Y with the citation window expanded so that it covers Y − 3 to Y. The above properties of new CiteScore are proved with some simplifying assumptions because a strict proof is difficult. Examples that demonstrate these properties are also provided. Finally, a suggestion is given to improve the rationality of the journal impact indexes.

Suggested Citation

  • Hui Fang, 2021. "Analysis of the new scopus CiteScore," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 5321-5331, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:126:y:2021:i:6:d:10.1007_s11192-021-03964-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-021-03964-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-021-03964-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-021-03964-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Liu, Xuan Zhen & Fang, Hui, 2020. "A comparison among citation-based journal indicators and their relative changes with time," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(1).
    2. Hui Fang, 2020. "Investigating the journal impact along the columns and rows of the publication-citation matrix," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2265-2282, December.
    3. Wolfgang Glänzel & Balázs Schlemmer & Bart Thijs, 2003. "Better late than never? On the chance to become highly cited only beyond the standard bibliometric time horizon," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(3), pages 571-586, November.
    4. Jerome K. Vanclay, 2009. "Bias in the journal impact factor," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 78(1), pages 3-12, January.
    5. Hilary I. Okagbue & Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva & Abiodun A. Opanuga, 2020. "Disparities in document indexation in two databases (Scopus and Web of Science) among six subject domains, and the impact on journal-based metrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2821-2825, December.
    6. Waltman, Ludo, 2016. "A review of the literature on citation impact indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 365-391.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Lang Jia & Wenjuan Wang & Francis Zvomuya & Hailong He, 2024. "Trends in Soil Science over the Past Three Decades (1992–2022) Based on the Scientometric Analysis of 39 Soil Science Journals," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-32, March.
    2. Mina Moradzadeh & Shahram Sedghi & Sirous Panahi, 2023. "Towards a new paradigm for ‘journal quality’ criteria: a scoping review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(1), pages 279-321, January.
    3. Hui Fang, 2023. "A modification of citation-based journal indexes," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(2), pages 1119-1132, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hui Fang, 2023. "A modification of citation-based journal indexes," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(2), pages 1119-1132, February.
    2. Marcelo Mendoza, 2021. "Differences in Citation Patterns across Areas, Article Types and Age Groups of Researchers," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-23, October.
    3. Hui Fang, 2020. "Investigating the journal impact along the columns and rows of the publication-citation matrix," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2265-2282, December.
    4. Aurora A. C. Teixeira & Pedro Cosme Vieira & Ana Patrícia Abreu, 2017. "Sleeping Beauties and their princes in innovation studies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(2), pages 541-580, February.
    5. Lutz Bornmann & Adam Y. Ye & Fred Y. Ye, 2018. "Identifying “hot papers” and papers with “delayed recognition” in large-scale datasets by using dynamically normalized citation impact scores," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(2), pages 655-674, August.
    6. Hou, Jianhua & Yang, Xiucai, 2020. "Social media-based sleeping beauties: Defining, identifying and features," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2).
    7. Gabriel-Alexandru Vȋiu & Mihai Păunescu, 2021. "The lack of meaningful boundary differences between journal impact factor quartiles undermines their independent use in research evaluation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1495-1525, February.
    8. Zhenyu Gou & Fan Meng & Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez & Yi Bu, 2022. "Encoding the citation life-cycle: the operationalization of a literature-aging conceptual model," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 5027-5052, August.
    9. Mrowinski, Maciej J. & Gagolewski, Marek & Siudem, Grzegorz, 2022. "Accidentality in journal citation patterns," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).
    10. Sandra Rousseau & Ronald Rousseau, 2021. "Bibliometric Techniques And Their Use In Business And Economics Research," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(5), pages 1428-1451, December.
    11. Finardi, Ugo, 2014. "On the time evolution of received citations, in different scientific fields: An empirical study," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 13-24.
    12. Rabishankar Giri & Sabuj Kumar Chaudhuri, 2021. "Ranking journals through the lens of active visibility," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(3), pages 2189-2208, March.
    13. Broccardo, Laura & Vola, Paola & Zicari, Adrian & Alshibani, Safiya Mukhtar, 2023. "Contingency-based analysis of the drivers and obstacles to a successful sustainable business model: Seeking the uncaptured value," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    14. Aleskerov, F. & Kazachinskaya, A. & Karabekyan, D. & Semina, A. & Yakuba, V., 2021. "Economic journals of Russia, their characteristics and network analysis," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 50(2), pages 170-182.
    15. 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.
    16. András Schubert & Wolfgang Glänzel & Gábor Schubert, 2022. "Eponyms in science: famed or framed?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(3), pages 1199-1207, March.
    17. A Cecile J W Janssens & Michael Goodman & Kimberly R Powell & Marta Gwinn, 2017. "A critical evaluation of the algorithm behind the Relative Citation Ratio (RCR)," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-5, October.
    18. Abdelghani Maddi & Aouatif de La Laurencie, 2018. "La dynamique des SHS françaises dans le Web of Science : un manque de représentativité ou de visibilité internationale ?," CEPN Working Papers hal-01922266, HAL.
    19. Mutz, Rüdiger & Daniel, Hans-Dieter, 2018. "The bibliometric quotient (BQ), or how to measure a researcher’s performance capacity: A Bayesian Poisson Rasch model," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 1282-1295.
    20. Juan Miguel Campanario, 2018. "Are leaders really leading? Journals that are first in Web of Science subject categories in the context of their groups," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 111-130, April.

    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:spr:scient:v:126:y:2021:i:6:d:10.1007_s11192-021-03964-5. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.