On the fairness of using relative indicators for comparing citation performance in different disciplines
Castellano, C, Radicchi, FArch. Immunol. Ther. Ex. 57, 85 - 90 (2009)
Times cited: 17
Abstract
Relative indicators are commonly used to remove biases due to different
citation practices in various scientific fields. Here we extend our
recent investigation on the viability of the use of relative indicators
for comparing article impact in different disciplines. We consider
citation distributions for papers published in 14 of the 172
disciplines categorized by the Journal Citation Reports. The
distribution of the number of citations received by publications in a
certain discipline divided by the average number for the discipline is
a universal function. Based on it, we compute the relative number of
citations needed to be among the q percent most-cited publications in a
discipline. The effect of finite samples is also discussed. The average
number of citations is shown to be strongly correlated with the impact
factor, but fluctuations are quite large. A similar universal
distribution is found (with exceptions) when citation distributions
restricted to papers published in a single journal are considered.