[1] Abbasi, A., Altmann, J., & Hossain, L. (2011). Identifying the effects of co-authorship networks on the performance of scholars: A correlation and regression analysis of performance measures and social network analysis measures. Journal of Informetrics, 5(4), 594–607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2011.05.007.
[2] Abbasi, A., & Jamali, H. R. (2019). University research diversification effect on its citation-based performance: A study of Australian universities. 17th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, ISSI 2019 - Proceedings, 1, 489–500.
[3] Aksnes, D., Langfeldt, L., & Wouters, P. (2019). Citations, citation indicators, and research quality: An overview of basic concepts and theories. SAGE Open, 9(1), 215824401982957. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019829575.
[4] Aliguliyev, R. M., & Adigozalova, N. A. (2022). H -type indices for multiple authorship papers based on “relative first author” principle. COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 16(2), 305–330. https://doi.org/10.1080/09737766.2022.2098875.
[5] Amjad, T., Shahid, N., Daud, A., & Khatoon, A. (2022). Citation burst prediction in a bibliometric network. Scientometrics, 127(5), 2773–2790. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04344-3.
[6] Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975.
[7] Berche, B., Holovatch, Y., Kenna, R., & Mryglod, O. (2016). Academic research groups: Evaluation of their quality and quality of their evaluation. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 681, 12004–12004. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/681/1/012004.
[8] Bornmann, L. (2017). Is collaboration among scientists related to the citation impact of papers because their quality increases with collaboration? An analysis based on data from F1000Prime and normalized citation scores. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(4), 1036–1047. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23728.
[9] Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H.-D. (2009). Universality of citation distributions-A validation of Radicchi et al.’s relative indicator cf = c/c0 at the micro level using data from chemistry. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(8), 1664–1670. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21076.
[10] Bornmann, L., & Leydesdorff, L. (2013). The validation of (advanced) bibliometric indicators through peer assessments: A comparative study using data from InCites and F1000. Journal of Informetrics, 7(2), 286–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2012.12.003.
[11] Bornmann, L., & Marx, W. (2014). Distributions instead of single numbers: Percentiles and beam plots for the assessment of single researchers. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(1), 206–208. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22996.
[12] Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., & Daniel, H.-D. (2008). Are there better indices for evaluation purposes than the h index? A comparison of nine different variants of the h index using data from biomedicine. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(5), 830–837. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20806.
[13] Bosquet, C., & Combes, P.-P. (2013). Are academics who publish more also more cited? Individual determinants of publication and citation records. Scientometrics, 97(3), 831–857. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-0996-6.
[14] Caon, M., Trapp, J., & Baldock, C. (2020). Citations are a good way to determine the quality of research. Physical and Engineering Sciences in Medicine, 43(4), 1145–1148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13246-020-00941-9.
[15] Charlton, B. G., & Andras, P. (2007). Evaluating universities using simple scientometric research-output metrics: Total citation counts per university for a retrospective seven-year rolling sample. Science and Public Policy, 34(8), 555–563. https://doi.org/10.3152/030234207X254413.
[16] Chen, S., Song, Y., Shu, F., & Larivière, V. (2022). Interdisciplinarity and impact: The effects of the citation time window. Scientometrics, 127(5), 2621–2642. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04338-1.
[17] Costas, R., van Leeuwen, T. N., & Bordons, M. (2010). Self-citations at the meso and individual levels: Effects of different calculation methods. Scientometrics, 82(3), 517–537. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0187-7.
[18] Daud, A., Hayat, M. K., Alshdadi, A. A., Banjar, A., & Alharbi, W. M. (2022). Measuring the impact of co-author count on citation count of research publications. COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 16(1), 35–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/09737766.2021.2016356.
[19] Dechow, P. M., Sloan, R. G., & Zeng, J. (Jieyin). (2019). Is It a Home Run? Measuring Relative Citation Rates in Accounting Research. Accounting Horizons, 34(1), 67–91. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch-52570.
[20] Demaine, J. (2022). Fractionalization of research impact reveals global trends in university collaboration. Scientometrics, 127(5), 2235–2247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04246-w.
[21] Didegah, F., & Thelwall, M. (2013). Determinants of research citation impact in nanoscience and nanotechnology. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(5), 1055–1064. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22806.
[22] Downes, B. J., & Lancaster, J. (2020). Celebrating women conducting research in freshwater ecology ... And how the citation game is damaging them. Marine and Freshwater Research, 71(2), 139–155. https://doi.org/10.1071/MF18436.
[23] Egghe, L. (2006). Theory and practise of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69(1), 131–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0144-7.
[24] Fanourgiakis, J., Panagiotakis, C., & Konstantourakis, I. (2021). Exploring the research-based ranking and the university impact in Greece: A case of peripheral departments of management and economics. COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 15(2), 305–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/09737766.2021.1978826.
[25] Froghi, S., Ahmed, K., Finch, A., Fitzpatrick, J. M., Khan, M. S., & Dasgupta, P. (2012). Indicators for research performance evaluation: An overview. BJU International, 109(3), 321–324. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10856.x.
[26] Halevi, G., Moed, H., & Bar-Ilan, J. (2017). Suitability of Google Scholar as a source of scientific information and as a source of data for scientific evaluation—Review of the Literature. Journal of Informetrics, 11(3), 823–834. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.06.005.
[27] Heßler, N., & Ziegler, A. (2022). Evidence-based recommendations for increasing the citation frequency of original articles. Scientometrics, 127(6), 3367–3381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04378-7.
[28] Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(46), 16569–16572. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102.
[29] Hirv, T. (2022). The interplay of the size of the research system, ways of collaboration, level, and method of funding in determining bibliometric outputs. Scientometrics, 127(3), 1295–1316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04232-2.
[30] Ioannidis, J., Boyack, K., & Wouters, P. (2016). Citation metrics: A primer on how (not) to normalize. PLOS Biology, 14(9), e1002542. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002542.
[31] Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2015). A generalized view of self-citation: Direct, co-author, collaborative, and coercive induced self-citation. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 78(1), 7–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2014.11.008.
[32] Jensen, M., & Meckling, W. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X.
[33] Kacem, A., Flatt, J. W., & Mayr, P. (2020). Tracking self-citations in academic publishing. Scientometrics, 123(2), 1157–1165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03413-9.
[34] Kenna, R., Mryglod, O., & Berche, B. (2017). A scientists’ view of scientometrics: Not everything that counts can be counted. ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:1703.10407.
[35] Khan, N. R., Thompson, C. J., Taylor, D. R., Venable, G. T., Matthew Wham, R., Madison Michael, L., & Klimo, P. (2014). An analysis of publication productivity for 1225 academic neurosurgeons and 99 departments in the United States: Clinical article. Journal of Neurosurgery, 120(3), 746–755. https://doi.org/10.3171/2013.11.JNS131708.
[36] Kostoff, R. N. (2002). Citation analysis of research performer quality. Scientometrics, 53(1), 49–71. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014831920172.
[37] Larivière, V., Gingras, Y., Sugimoto, C., & Tsou, A. (2015). Team size matters: Collaboration and scientific impact since 1900. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(7), 1323–1332. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23266.
[38] Lateef, A., Ogunkunle, A. T. J., & Adigun, G. O. (2016). Google scholar citation in retrospect: Visibility and contributions of African scholars. COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 10(2), 219–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/09737766.2016.1213966.
[39] Liu, J., Chen, H.-H., Ho, M. H.-C., & Li, Y.-C. (2014). Citations with different levels of relevancy: Tracing the main paths of legal opinions. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(12), 2479–2488. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23135.
[40] Maltseva, D., & Batagelj, V. (2022). Collaboration between authors in the field of social network analysis. Scientometrics, 127(6), 3437–3470. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04364-z.
[41] Milard, B. (2014). The social circles behind scientific references: Relationships between citing and cited authors in chemistry publications. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(12), Article 12. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23149.
[42] Mohammed, S., Morgan, A., & Nyantakyi, E. (2020). On the influence of uncited publications on a researcher’s h-index. Scientometrics, 122(3), 1791–1799. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03356-1.
[43] Moher, D., Naudet, F., Cristea, I. A., Miedema, F., Ioannidis, J. P. A., & Goodman, S. N. (2018). Assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure. PLoS Biology, 16(3), e2004089–e2004089. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2004089.
[44] Molléri, J. S., Petersen, K., & Mendes, E. (2018). Towards understanding the relation between citations and research quality in software engineering studies. Scientometrics, 117(3), 1453–1478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2907-3.
[45] Nightingale, J., & Marshall, G. (2012). Citation analysis as a measure of article quality, journal influence and individual researcher performance. Radiography, 18(2), 60–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2011.10.044.
[46] Osterloh, M., & Frey, B. (2015). Ranking games. Evaluation Review, 39(1), 102–129. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193841X14524957.
[47] Rüdiger, M. S., Antons, D., & Salge, T.-O. (2021). The explanatory power of citations: A new approach to unpacking impact in science. Scientometrics, 126(12), 9779–9809. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04103-w.
[48] Sjögårde, P., & Didegah, F. (2022). The association between topic growth and citation impact of research publications. Scientometrics, 127(4), 1903–1921. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04293-x.
[49] Sjögårde, P., & Didegah, F. (2022). The association between topic growth and citation impact of research publications. Scientometrics, 127(4), 1903–1921. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04293-x.
[50] Syamili, C., & Rekha, R. V. (2017). Do altmetric correlate with citation? : A study based on PLOS ONE journal. COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 11(1), 103–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/09737766.2016.1260815.
[51] Szomszor, M., Pendlebury, D. A., & Adams, J. (2020). How much is too much? The difference between research influence and self-citation excess. Scientometrics, 123(2), 1119–1147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03417-5.
[52] Tajedini, O., Ghazizade, A., & Sadatmoosavi, A. (2018). Identifying the Effects of Co-authorship Strategies on the Citation-based Performance of Scholars: A Social Networks Analysis. Journal of Scientometric Research, 7(1), 19–28. https://doi.org/10.5530/jscires.7.1.3.
[53] Thelwall, M. (2018). Microsoft Academic automatic document searches: Accuracy for journal articles and suitability for citation analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 12(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.11.001.
[54] Thelwall, M., & Maflahi, N. (2020). Academic collaboration rates and citation associations vary substantially between countries and fields. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 71(8), 968–978. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24315.
[55] Thompson, D., Callen, E., & Nahata, M. (2009). New indices in scholarship assessment. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 73(6), 111. https://doi.org/10.5688/aj7306111.
[56] Tian, S., Xu, X., & Li, P. (2021). Acknowledgement network and citation count: The moderating role of collaboration network. Scientometrics, 126(9), 7837–7857. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04090-y.
[57] Urlings, M., Duyx, B., Swaen, G., Bouter, L., & Zeegers, M. (2021). Citation bias and other determinants of citation in biomedical research: Findings from six citation networks. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 132, 71–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.11.019.
[58] Vrat, P. (2020). Assessment of research impact through citation analysis: A new approach. Journal of Advances in Management Research, 17(1), 160–172. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAMR-06-2019-0102.
[59] Vutsova, A., Hristov, T., & Arabadzhieva, M. (2021). Impact assessment of research evaluation in Bulgaria. COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 15(2), 341–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/09737766.2021.1962767.
[60] Waltman, L., & Costas, R. (2014). F1000 recommendations as a potential new data source for research evaluation: A comparison with citations. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(3), 433–445. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23040.
[61] Waltman, L., & van Eck, N. J. (2013). A systematic empirical comparison of different approaches for normalizing citation impact indicators. Journal of Informetrics, 7(4), 833–849. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.08.002.
[62] Wan, X., & Liu, F. (2014a). Are all literature citations equally important? Automatic citation strength estimation and its applications. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(9), 1929–1938. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23083.
[63] Wan, X., & Liu, F. (2014b). WL-index: Leveraging citation mention number to quantify an individual’s scientific impact. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(12), 2509–2517. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23151.
[64] Wiechetek, Ł., & Pastuszak, Z. (2022). Academic social networks metrics: An effective indicator for university performance? Scientometrics, 127(3), 1381–1401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04258-6.
[65] Wildgaard, L., Schneider, J., & Larsen, B. (2014). A review of the characteristics of 108 author-level bibliometric indicators. Scientometrics, 101(1), 125–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1423-3.
[66] Wooldridge, J., & King, M. B. (2019). Altmetric scores: An early indicator of research impact. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 70(3), 271–282. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24122.
[67] Yang, K., Lee, J., & Choi, S.-H. (2013). Comparison of Citation Indexes in Korea: An Exploratory Study. Collnet Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 7(2), 231–245. https://doi.org/10.1080/09737766.2013.832905.
[68] Zhang, X., Xie, Q., & Song, M. (2021). Measuring the impact of novelty, bibliometric, and academic-network factors on citation count using a neural network. Journal of Informetrics, 15(2), 101140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2021.101140.
[69] Zhao, D., & Strotmann, A. (2016). Dimensions and uncertainties of author citation rankings: Lessons learned from frequency-weighted in-text citation counting. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(3), 671–682. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23418.
[70] Zitt, M. (2013). Variability of citation behavior between scientific fields and the normalization problem: The “citing-side” normalization in context. Collnet Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 7(1), 55–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/09737766.2013.802619.
[71] Zou, C., & Peterson, J. B. (2016). Quantifying the scientific output of new researchers using the zp-index. Scientometrics, 106(3), 901–916. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1807-z.