中国科学院文献情报中心机构知识库
Advanced  
NSL OpenIR  > Journal of Data and Information Science  > Journal of Data and Information Science-2016  > 期刊论文
Title: The Power-weakness Ratios (PWR) as a Journal Indicator: Testing the “Tournaments” Metaphor in Citation Impact Studies
Author: Loet Leydesdorff1; Wouter de Nooy1; Lutz Bornmann2
Source: Journal of Data and Information Science
Issued Date: 2016-09-18
Volume: 1, Issue:3, Pages:6-26
Keyword: Citation ; Impact ; Ranking ; Power ; Matrix ; Homogeneity
Subject: 新闻学与传播学 ; 图书馆、情报与文献学
Indexed Type: 其他
DOI: 10.20309/jdis.201617
Corresponding Author: Loet Leydesdorff (E-mail: loet@leydesdorff.net).
DOC Type: Research Papers
Abstract:
Purpose: Ramanujacharyulu developed the Power-weakness Ratio (PWR) for scoring tournaments. The PWR algorithm has been advocated (and used) for measuring the impact of journals. We show how such a newly proposed indicator can empirically be tested.
Design/methodology/approach: PWR values can be found by recursively multiplying the citation matrix by itself until convergence is reached in both the cited and citing dimensions; the quotient of these two values is defined as PWR. We study the effectiveness of PWR using journal ecosystems drawn from the Library and Information Science (LIS) set of the Web of Science (83 journals) as an example. Pajek is used to compute PWRs for the full set, and Excel for the computation in the case of the two smaller sub-graphs: (1) JASIST+ the seven journals that cite JASIST more than 100 times in 2012; and (2) MIS Quart+ the nine journals citing this journal to the same extent.
Findings: A test using the set of 83 journals converged, but did not provide interpretable results. Further decomposition of this set into homogeneous sub-graphs shows that—like most other journal indicators—PWR can perhaps be used within homogeneous sets, but not across citation communities. We conclude that PWR does not work as a journal impact indicator; journal impact, for example, is not a tournament.
Research limitations: Journals that are not represented on the “citing” dimension of the matrix—for example, because they no longer appear, but are still registered as “cited” (e.g. ARIST)—distort the PWR ranking because of zeros or very low values in the denominator.
Practical implications: The association of “cited” with “power” and “citing” with “weakness” can be considered as a metaphor. In our opinion, referencing is an actor category and can be Metaphor in Citation Impact Studies in terms of behavior, whereas “citedness” is a property of a document with an expected dynamics very different from that of “citing.” From this perspective, the PWR model is not valid as a journal indicator.
Originality/value: Arguments for using PWR are: (1) its symmetrical handling of the rows and columns in the asymmetrical citation matrix, (2) its recursive algorithm, and (3) its mathematical elegance. In this study, PWR is discussed and critically assessed.
English Abstract:
Purpose: Ramanujacharyulu developed the Power-weakness Ratio (PWR) for scoring tournaments. The PWR algorithm has been advocated (and used) for measuring the impact of journals. We show how such a newly proposed indicator can empirically be tested.
Design/methodology/approach: PWR values can be found by recursively multiplying the citation matrix by itself until convergence is reached in both the cited and citing dimensions; the quotient of these two values is defined as PWR. We study the effectiveness of PWR using journal ecosystems drawn from the Library and Information Science (LIS) set of the Web of Science (83 journals) as an example. Pajek is used to compute PWRs for the full set, and Excel for the computation in the case of the two smaller sub-graphs: (1) JASIST+ the seven journals that cite JASIST more than 100 times in 2012; and (2) MIS Quart+ the nine journals citing this journal to the same extent.
Findings: A test using the set of 83 journals converged, but did not provide interpretable results. Further decomposition of this set into homogeneous sub-graphs shows that—like most other journal indicators—PWR can perhaps be used within homogeneous sets, but not across citation communities. We conclude that PWR does not work as a journal impact indicator; journal impact, for example, is not a tournament.
Research limitations: Journals that are not represented on the “citing” dimension of the matrix—for example, because they no longer appear, but are still registered as “cited” (e.g. ARIST)—distort the PWR ranking because of zeros or very low values in the denominator.
Practical implications: The association of “cited” with “power” and “citing” with “weakness” can be considered as a metaphor. In our opinion, referencing is an actor category and can be Metaphor in Citation Impact Studies in terms of behavior, whereas “citedness” is a property of a document with an expected dynamics very different from that of “citing.” From this perspective, the PWR model is not valid as a journal indicator.
Originality/value: Arguments for using PWR are: (1) its symmetrical handling of the rows and columns in the asymmetrical citation matrix, (2) its recursive algorithm, and (3) its mathematical elegance. In this study, PWR is discussed and critically assessed.
Project: The authors acknowledge Gangan Prathap for discussing the PWR method with us in detail.
Related URLs: 查看原文
Language: 英语
Citation statistics:
Content Type: 期刊论文
URI: http://ir.las.ac.cn/handle/12502/8729
Appears in Collections:Journal of Data and Information Science_Journal of Data and Information Science-2016 _期刊论文

Files in This Item: Download All
File Name/ File Size Content Type Version Access License
20160302.pdf(1548KB)期刊论文作者接受稿开放获取View Download

description.institution: 1.Amsterdam School of Communication Research, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1001 NG, The Netherlands
2.Division for Science and Innovation Studies, Administrative Headquarters of the Max Planck Society, Munich 80539, Germany

Recommended Citation:
Loet Leydesdorff,Wouter de Nooy,Lutz Bornmann. The Power-weakness Ratios (PWR) as a Journal Indicator: Testing the “Tournaments” Metaphor in Citation Impact Studies[J]. Journal of Data and Information Science,2016,1(3):6-26.
Service
Recommend this item
Sava as my favorate item
Show this item's statistics
Export Endnote File
Google Scholar
Similar articles in Google Scholar
[Loet Leydesdorff]'s Articles
[Wouter de Nooy]'s Articles
[Lutz Bornmann]'s Articles
CSDL cross search
Similar articles in CSDL Cross Search
[Loet Leydesdorff]‘s Articles
[Wouter de Nooy]‘s Articles
[Lutz Bornmann]‘s Articles
Related Copyright Policies
Null
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit
文件名: 20160302.pdf
格式: Adobe PDF
所有评论 (0)
暂无评论
 
评注功能仅针对注册用户开放,请您登录
您对该条目有什么异议,请填写以下表单,管理员会尽快联系您。
内 容:
Email:  *
单位:
验证码:   刷新
您在IR的使用过程中有什么好的想法或者建议可以反馈给我们。
标 题:
 *
内 容:
Email:  *
验证码:   刷新

Items in IR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

 

 

Valid XHTML 1.0!
Copyright © 2007-2017  中国科学院文献情报中心 - Feedback
Powered by CSpace