Counting methods are decisive for rankings based on publication and citation studies

Marianne Gauffriau and Peder Olesen Larsen
Additional contact information
Marianne Gauffriau: Royal School of Library and Information Science, Copenhagen (Denmark)
Peder Olesen Larsen: Steno Institute, Aarhus University

Scientometrics, 2005, vol. 64, issue 1, No 6, 85-93

Abstract: Summary For all rankings of countries research output based on number of publications or citations compared with population, GDP, R&D and public R&D expenses, and other national characteristics the counting method is decisive. Total counting (full credit to a country when at least one of the authors is from this country) and Fractional Counting (a country receives a fraction of full credit for a publication equal to the fraction of authors from this country) of publications give widely different results. Counting methods must be stated, rankings based on different counting methods cannot be compared, and Fractional Counting is to be preferred.

Date: 2005
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (34)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-005-0239-6 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:scient:v:64:y:2005:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-005-0239-6

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11192

DOI: 10.1007/s11192-005-0239-6

Access Statistics for this article

Scientometrics is currently edited by Wolfgang Glänzel

More articles in Scientometrics from Springer, Akadémiai Kiadó
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().