2010/05/26 by Henk F. Moed, Moed, Henk F. · 1 citation
Computer Science · Decision Sciences · Physics and Astronomy · #Digital Libraries (cs.DL) #FOS: Computer and information sciences #FOS: Physical sciences #Physics and Society (physics.soc-ph) #cs.DL #physics.soc-ph #scientometrics and bibliometrics research
paper · pdf · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1005.4906
arxiv created 2010/05/26 · openalex publication_date 2010/05/26 · arxiv updated 2010/05/27 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/28
This paper is a reply to the article "Scopus's Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) versus a Journal Impact Factor based on Fractional Counting of Citations", published by Loet Leydesdorff and Tobias Opthof (arXiv:1004.3580v2 [cs.DL]). It clarifies the relationship between SNIP and Elsevier's Scopus. Since Leydesdorff and Opthof's description of SNIP is not complete, it indicates four key differences between SNIP and the indicator proposed by the two authors, and argues why the former is more valid than the latter. Nevertheless, the idea of fractional citation counting deserves further exploration. The paper discusses difficulties that arise if one attempts to apply this principle at the level of individual (citing) papers.