{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,8,2]],"date-time":"2025-08-02T17:53:29Z","timestamp":1754157209612,"version":"3.41.2"},"reference-count":11,"publisher":"Emerald","issue":"6","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2004,12,1]],"date-time":"2004-12-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1101859200000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.emerald.com\/insight\/site-policies"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":[],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2004,12,1]]},"abstract":"<jats:p>In two case studies of research units, reference values used to benchmark research performance appeared to show contradictory results: the average citation level in the subfields (FCSm) increased world\u2010wide, while the citation level of the journals (JCSm) decreased, where concomitant changes were expected. Explanations were sought in: a shift in preference of document types; a change in publication preference for subfields; and changes in journal coverage. Publishing in newly covered journals with a low impact had a negative effect on impact ratios. However, the main factor behind the increase in FCSm was the distribution of articles across the five\u2010year block periods that were studied. Publication in lower impact journals produced a lagging JCSm. Actual values of JCSm, FCSm, and citations per publication (CPP) values are not very informative either about research performance, or about the development of impact over time in a certain subfield with block indicators. Normalized citation impact indicators are free from such effects and should be consulted primarily in research performance assessments.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1108\/00220410410568142","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2004,11,2]],"date-time":"2004-11-02T23:45:54Z","timestamp":1099439154000},"page":"658-672","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":7,"title":["Quantitative deconstruction of citation impact indicators"],"prefix":"10.1108","volume":"60","author":[{"given":"A.J.","family":"Nederhof","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"M.S.","family":"Visser","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"140","reference":[{"key":"key2022012920002141900_b1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Adair, J.G. and Vohra, N. (2003), \u201cThe explosion of knowledge, references, and citations: psychology's unique response to a crisis\u201d, American Psychologist, Vol. 58 No. 1, pp. 15\u201023.","DOI":"10.1037\/0003-066X.58.1.15"},{"key":"key2022012920002141900_b3","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Leydesdorff, L. (2003), \u201cCan networks of journal\u2010journal citations be used as indicators of change in the social sciences?\u201d, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 59 No. 1, pp. 84\u2010104.","DOI":"10.1108\/00220410310458028"},{"key":"key2022012920002141900_b4","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Moed, H.F., De Bruin, R.E. and Van Leeuwen, T.N. (1995), \u201cNew bibliometric tools for the assessment of national research performance: database description, overview of indicators and first applications\u201d, Scientometrics, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 381\u2010425.","DOI":"10.1007\/BF02017338"},{"key":"key2022012920002141900_b5","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Nederhof, A.J. and Van Wijk, E. (1999), \u201cProfiling institutes: identifying high research performance and social relevance in the social and behavioral sciences\u201d, Scientometrics, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 487\u2010506.","DOI":"10.1007\/BF02458491"},{"key":"key2022012920002141900_b6","unstructured":"Nederhof, A.J., Van Leeuwen, T.N., Visser, M.S. and Van der Wurff, L.J. (1999), \u201cBibliometric profiles of academic Veterinary and Animal Sciences research in The Netherlands, 1989\u20101998\u201d, Veterinary and Animal Sciences, VSNU, Utrecht, pp. 51\u201092."},{"key":"key2022012920002141900_b7","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Schubert, A. and Gl\u00e4nzel, W. (1983), \u201cStatistical reliability of comparisons based on the citation impact of scientific publications\u201d, Scientometrics, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 59\u201074.","DOI":"10.1007\/BF02097178"},{"key":"key2022012920002141900_b8","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Schubert, A., Gl\u00e4nzel, W. and Braun, T. (1989), \u201cScientometric data files. A comprehensive set of indicators on 2,649 journals and 96 countries in all major science fields and subfields 1981\u20101985\u201d, Scientometrics, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 3\u2010478.","DOI":"10.1007\/BF02093234"},{"key":"key2022012920002141900_b9","unstructured":"Science Watch (2003), \u201cTwenty years of citation superstars\u201d, Vol. 14 No. 5, pp. 1\u20102."},{"key":"key2022012920002141900_b10","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Van Raan, A.F.J. (1996), \u201cAdvanced bibliometric methods as quantitative core of peer review based evaluation and foresight exercises\u201d, Scientometrics, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 396\u2010420.","DOI":"10.1007\/BF02129602"},{"key":"key2022012920002141900_b11","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Zitt, M., Ramanana\u2010Rahary, S. and Bassecoulard, E. (2003), \u201cCorrecting glasses help fair comparisons in international science landscape: country indicators as a function of ISI database delineation\u201d, Scientometrics, Vol. 56 No. 2, pp. 259\u201082.","DOI":"10.1023\/A:1021923329277"},{"key":"key2022012920002141900_frg1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Ingwersen, P., Larsen, B. and Noyons, E. (2001), \u201cMapping national research profiles in social science disciplines\u201d, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 57 No. 6, pp. 715\u201040.","DOI":"10.1108\/EUM0000000007098"}],"container-title":["Journal of Documentation"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"http:\/\/www.emeraldinsight.com\/doi\/full-xml\/10.1108\/00220410410568142","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/www.emerald.com\/insight\/content\/doi\/10.1108\/00220410410568142\/full\/xml","content-type":"application\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/www.emerald.com\/insight\/content\/doi\/10.1108\/00220410410568142\/full\/html","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,7,24]],"date-time":"2025-07-24T23:37:25Z","timestamp":1753400245000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"http:\/\/www.emerald.com\/jd\/article\/60\/6\/658-672\/217504"}},"subtitle":["Waxing field impact but waning journal impact"],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2004,12,1]]},"references-count":11,"journal-issue":{"issue":"6","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2004,12,1]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1108\/00220410410568142"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1108\/00220410410568142","relation":{},"ISSN":["0022-0418"],"issn-type":[{"type":"print","value":"0022-0418"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2004,12,1]]}}}