The Eigenfactor™ Metrics: Figure 1.

Carl T. Bergstrom · Jevin D. West · Marc A. Wiseman

407 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Neuroscience

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

scientometrics and bibliometrics research Psychology Research and Bibliometrics Web visibility and informetrics

Abstract

Quantitative metrics are poor choices for assessing the research output of an individual scholar. Summing impact factors, counting citations, tallying an h-index, or looking at Eigenfactor™ Scores (described below)—none of these methods are adequate compared with what should be the gold standard

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 407 citations exist upstream.

References

2007Eigenfactor: Measuring the value and prestige of scholarly journals

Cited by

2015Understanding Bibliometric Parameters and Analysis 2017Big Scholarly Data: A Survey 2020Racial and ethnic imbalance in neuroscience reference lists and intersections with gender 2011Diversity, value and limitations of the journal impact factor and alternative metrics 2017Quantifying patterns of research-interest evolution 2011Evaluating Research and Impact: A Bibliometric Analysis of Research by the NIH/NIAID HIV/AIDS Clinical Trials Networks 2013Altmetrics: New indicators for scientific communication in Web 2.0 2023Data, measurement and empirical methods in the science of science

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.