A farewell to the MNCS and like size-independent indicators

The arguments presented demonstrate that the Mean Normalized Citation Score (MNCS) and other size-independent indicators based on the ratio to publications are not indicators of research performance. The article provides examples of the distortions when rankings by MNCS are compared to those based on indicators of productivity. The authors propose recommendations for the scientometric community to switch to ranking by research efficiency, instead of MNCS and other size-independent indicators.

[1]  Giovanni Abramo,et al.  Assessing the accuracy of the h- and g-indexes for measuring researchers' productivity , 2013, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[2]  Koenraad Debackere,et al.  The application of citation-based performance classes to the disciplinary and multidisciplinary assessment in national comparison and institutional research assessment , 2014, Scientometrics.

[3]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  h-Index: A review focused in its variants, computation and standardization for different scientific fields , 2009, J. Informetrics.

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

[5]  Vincent Larivière,et al.  Averages of ratios vs. ratios of averages: An empirical analysis of four levels of aggregation , 2011, J. Informetrics.

[6]  Mike Thelwall,et al.  More precise methods for national research citation impact comparisons , 2015, J. Informetrics.

[7]  Giovanni Abramo,et al.  A farewell to the MNCS and like size-independent indicators: Rejoinder , 2016, J. Informetrics.

[8]  H. Moed.  CWTS crown indicator measures citation impact of a research group's publication oeuvre , 2010, J. Informetrics.

[9]  Giovanni Abramo,et al.  How do you define and measure research productivity? , 2014, Scientometrics.

[10]  Péter Vinkler,et al.  The case of scientometricians with the "absolute relative" impact indicator , 2012, J. Informetrics.

[11]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Caveats for the journal and field normalizations in the CWTS ("Leiden") evaluations of research performance , 2010, J. Informetrics.

[12]  Giovanni Abramo,et al.  Assessment of sectoral aggregation distortion in research productivity measurements , 2008 .

[13]  A. Raan.  Measuring Science: Capita Selecta of Current Main Issues , 2004 .

[14]  Ludo Waltman,et al.  Field-normalized citation impact indicators using algorithmically constructed classification systems of science , 2015, J. Informetrics.

[15]  Jonas Lundberg,et al.  Lifting the crown - citation z-score , 2007, J. Informetrics.

[16]  Thed N. van Leeuwen,et al.  New bibliometric tools for the assessment of national research performance: Database description, overview of indicators and first applications , 1995, Scientometrics.

[17]  Michel Zitt,et al.  Relativity of citation performance and excellence measures: From cross-field to cross-scale effects of field-normalisation , 2005, Scientometrics.

[18]  Giovanni Abramo,et al.  Rethinking research evaluation indicators and methods from an economic perspective: the FSS indicator as a proxy of productivity , 2013 .

[19]  Giovanni Abramo,et al.  National research assessment exercises: a measure of the distortion of performance rankings when labor input is treated as uniform , 2010, Scientometrics.

[20]  J. E. Hirsch,et al.  An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output , 2005, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA.

[21]  Thed N. van Leeuwen,et al.  Towards a new crown indicator: Some theoretical considerations , 2010, J. Informetrics.

[22]  Giovanni Abramo,et al.  Ranking research institutions by the number of highly-cited articles per scientist , 2015, J. Informetrics.

[23]  Charles Oppenheim,et al.  The h-index: a broad review of a new bibliometric indicator , 2010, J. Documentation.

[24]  Giovanni Abramo,et al.  National-scale research performance assessment at the individual level , 2011, Scientometrics.

[25]  Leo Egghe,et al.  The Hirsch index and related impact measures , 2010, Annu. Rev. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[26]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Remaining problems with the "New Crown Indicator" (MNCS) of the CWTS , 2010, J. Informetrics.

[27]  Thed N. van Leeuwen,et al.  Rivals for the crown: Reply to Opthof and Leydesdorff , 2010, J. Informetrics.

[28]  Fredrik Niclas Piro,et al.  Are mobile researchers more productive and cited than non-mobile researchers? A large-scale study of Norwegian scientists , 2013 .