Access
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Commentary
Nature 444, 1003-1004 (21 December 2006) | doi:10.1038/4441003a; Published online 21 December 2006
Measures for measures
Sune Lehmann1, Andrew D. Jackson2 & Benny E. Lautrup2
- Sune Lehmann is at the Department of Informatics and Mathematical Modeling, Technical University of Denmark, DK-2800, Lyngby, Denmark.
- Andrew D. Jackson and Benny E. Lautrup are at The Niels Bohr Institute, Blegdamsvej 17, DK-2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Abstract
Are some ways of measuring scientific quality better than others? Sune Lehmann, Andrew D. Jackson and Benny E. Lautrup analyse the reliability of commonly used methods for comparing citation records.
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.
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
MORE ARTICLES LIKE THIS
These links to content published by NPG are automatically generated.
NEWS AND VIEWS
Mathematical physics Added dimensions to grain growthNature News and Views (26 Apr 2007)
Biogeochemistry Iron findingsNature News and Views (26 Apr 2007)