ExcEllEncE with lEadErship: the crown indicator of scimago institutions rankings ibEr rEport

Although there are many models for ranking higher education institutions, the SCImago Institutions Rankings methodology stands out for its ability to present quantitative and qualitative indicators of scientific output. Besides Total number of published papers, several indicators are concerned with quality dimensions of published papers, such as International collaboration, Scientific leadership or High quality publications. However, official rankings are provided solely on the basis of one indicator: Output (total number of published papers). This paper presents a statistical I-distance method that integrates all the indicators into one value, which therefore represent a rank and show which of the input indicators is the most important for the process of ranking. Our results clearly showed that Excellence with Leadership occupies the most significant spot. Nota: Este artículo puede leerse traducido al español en: http://www.elprofesionaldelainformacion.com/contenidos/2013/sept/13_esp.pdf Excellence with leadership: the crown indicator of SCImago Institutions Rankings Iber report El profesional de la información, 2013, septiembre-octubre, v. 22, n. 5. ISSN: 1386-6710 475

[1]  Félix De-Moya-Anegón.  Liderazgo y excelencia de la ciencia española , 2012 .

[2]  Domingo Docampo,et al.  On using the Shanghai ranking to assess the research performance of university systems , 2010, Scientometrics.

[3]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  A methodology for Institution-Field ranking based on a bidimensional analysis: the IFQ2A index , 2011, Scientometrics.

[4]  Bárbara S. Lancho-Barrantes,et al.  Citation increments between collaborating countries , 2012, Scientometrics.

[5]  Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez,et al.  Open access and Scopus: A new approach to scientific visibility from the standpoint of access , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[6]  A. Saltelli,et al.  Rickety numbers: Volatility of university rankings and policy implications , 2011 .

[7]  S. Arabia.  Evaluating the health of nations: a Libyan perspective , 2011 .

[8]  E. Hazelkorn.  Rankings and the Reshaping of Higher Education: The Battle for World-Class Excellence , 2011 .

[9]  José Luis Ortega,et al.  Comparing university rankings , 2010, Scientometrics.

[10]  Cinzia Daraio,et al.  The differentiation of the strategic profile of higher education institutions. New positioning indicators based on microdata , 2008, Scientometrics.

[11]  T. Agasisti,et al.  Comparing efficiency in a cross-country perspective: the case of Italian and Spanish state universities , 2007 .

[12]  Veljko Jeremic,et al.  A fresh approach to evaluating the academic ranking of world universities , 2011, Scientometrics.

[13]  Nicholas A. Bowman,et al.  Anchoring effects in world university rankings: exploring biases in reputation scores , 2011 .

[14]  V. Jeremic,et al.  A Novel Approach to Evaluating Sustainable Development , 2012 .

[15]  Jeremic Veljko Milojko,et al.  A New Approach in the Evaluation of Team Chess Championships Rankings , 2010 .

[16]  Veljko Jeremic,et al.  Sustainable development and public health: rating European countries , 2013, BMC Public Health.

[17]  G. Savić,et al.  An Evaluation of European Countries' Health Systems through Distance Based Analysis. , 2012, Hippokratia.

[18]  Félix Moya-Anegón,et al.  Analysis of Europe’s scientific production on renewable energies , 2011 .

[19]  Ricardo Arencibia-Jorge,et al.  Comparison of SCImago journal rank indicator with journal impact factor , 2008, FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology.

[20]  Domingo Docampo,et al.  Reproducibility of the Shanghai academic ranking of world universities results , 2013, Scientometrics.

[21]  Catherine Dehon,et al.  Uncovering excellence in academic rankings: a closer look at the Shanghai ranking , 2009, Scientometrics.

[22]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  Ranking of research output of universities on the basis of the multidimensional prestige of influential fields: Spanish universities as a case of study , 2012, Scientometrics.

[23]  Domingo Docampo.  Adjusted sum of institutional scores as an indicator of the presence of university systems in the ARWU ranking , 2011, Scientometrics.

[24]  Jean-Charles Billaut,et al.  Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking? , 2010, Scientometrics.

[25]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  The detection of "hot regions" in the geography of science: A visualization approach by using density maps , 2011, J. Informetrics.

[26]  Gerald L. Baliles,et al.  Higher Education and the Public Good. , 1994 .

[27]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  The new Excellence Indicator in the World Report of the SCImago Institutions Rankings 2011 , 2011, J. Informetrics.

[28]  Gangan Prathap,et al.  An impact-citations-exergy (iCX) trajectory analysis of leading research institutions in India , 2011, Scientometrics.

[29]  Andrea Saltelli,et al.  Ratings and rankings: voodoo or science? , 2011, 1104.3009.

[30]  Henk F. Moed,et al.  A ranking of universities should account for differences in their disciplinary specialization , 2011, Scientometrics.

[31]  Vicente P. Guerrero-Bote,et al.  Quantifying the benefits of international scientific collaboration , 2013, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[32]  Aleksandar Markovic,et al.  A new perspective on the ICT Development Index , 2012 .

[33]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Which cities produce more excellent papers than can be expected? A new mapping approach, using Google Maps, based on statistical significance testing , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[34]  D. Court,et al.  Constructing knowledge societies : new challenges for tertiary education , 2002 .

[35]  P. Hien.  A comparative study of research capabilities of East Asian countries and implications for Vietnam , 2010 .

[36]  Gangan Prathap.  The quality-quantity-quasity and energy-exergy-entropy exegesis of expected value calculation of citation performance , 2011, Scientometrics.

[37]  Thed N. van Leeuwen,et al.  The Leiden ranking 2011/2012: Data collection, indicators, and interpretation , 2012, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..