Fractionally Counted Versus Integer-Counted Impact Factors In The Isi Journal Set 2008

Loet Leydesdorff,Lutz Bornmann

2011-01-01

Abstract:The ISI-Impact Factors suffer from a number of drawbacks, among them the incomparability among fields of science because of systematic differences in citation behavior among fields. Can this problem be counteracted by counting citation weights fractionally instead of using whole numbers in the numerators? Fractional citation counts are normalized in terms of the citing sources and thus would take into account differences in citation behavior among fields of science. Differences in the resulting distributions can be tested statistically for their significance at different levels of aggregation. A list of fractionally counted Impact Factors for 2008 is available online at http://www.leydesdorff.net/weighted_if/weighted_if.xls. Using these weighted impact factors, the in-between group variance among the thirteen fields of science identified in the U.S. Science and Engineering Indicators is no longer statistically significant. Although citation behavior differs largely between disciplines, the reflection of these differences in citation distributions cannot-vice versa-be used as a reliable instrument for the classification (Leydesdorff & Bornmann, 2011).