Search

Within the current panorama of science evaluation, the limitations of citation indexes to study the social sciences and humanities have been the subject of wide debate. To resolve this situation, different products have been created for use in national contexts, since they cover certain aspects not contained in more international indices. An example is the In-RECS family, where an indicator such as the impact factor of Eugene Garfield is defined, but its contribution lies in the ability to evaluate research in Spain by obtaining citation indicators. This paper thus highlights the need to create new products for research evaluation in general, but particularly in the social sciences and humanities. The context in which different alternatives arise and are developed to evaluate existing journals is presented, along with Dialnet Metrics, a citation index developed by the Dialnet Foundation in collaboration with the EC3 Group and dozens of Spanish universities. Based on an analysis of the citations of source journals from different subject areas, Dialnet Metrics provides indicators to evaluate the research impact at different levels. This bibliometric product enables contextualized analysis at the micro (researchers), meso (journals), and macro (areas and universities) levels. Finally, the content, data volumes, and structure of this citation index are described quantitatively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the end of the 1980s, citation impact values -especially for evaluative purposes- are increasingly presented as fieldnormalized citation scores than as bare citation counts or citation rates. In rather popular variants of the scores, the average score over a publication year is not exactly one due to multiple Web of Science subject categories per paper. We propose a scaling method which introduces slight changes in the field-normalized scores of each paper that ensures that the average value of all scores equals one. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]