首页> 外文期刊>Nature >Measures for measures
【24h】

Measures for measures

机译:措施措施

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Although quantifying the quality of individual scientists is difficult, the general view is that it is better to publish more than less and that the citation count of a paper (relative to citation habits in its field) is a useful measure of its quality. How citation counts are weighed and analysed in practice becomes important as publication records are increasingly used in funding, appointment and promotion decisions. Typically, a scientists full citation record is summarized by simpler measures, such as average citations per paper, or the recently proposed Hirsch index, which is ever more being used as an indicator of scientific quality. Despite their growing importance, there have been few attempts to discover which of the popular citation measures is best and whether any such measure is statistically reliable.
机译:尽管很难量化单个科学家的素质,但普遍的观点是,多发表多于发表更好,并且论文的引用次数(相对于其领域的引用习惯)是衡量其质量的有用指标。随着出版物记录越来越多地用于资助,任命和晋升决策,如何在实践中权衡和分析引文计数变得很重要。通常情况下,科学家的完整引文记录可以通过更简单的方法进行总结,例如每篇论文的平均引文或最近提出的Hirsch指数,该指数越来越多地被用作科学质量的指标。尽管它们的重要性越来越高,但几乎没有尝试发现哪种流行的引用措施是最佳的,以及任何此类措施在统计上是否可靠。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Nature》 |2006年第7122期|p.1003-1004|共2页
  • 作者单位

    Department of Informatics and Mathematical Modelin, Technical University of Denmark, DK-2800, Lyngby, Denmark;

  • 收录信息 美国《科学引文索引》(SCI);美国《工程索引》(EI);美国《生物学医学文摘》(MEDLINE);美国《化学文摘》(CA);
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 自然科学总论;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号