在CWTS（“莱顿”）研究绩效评估中对期刊和领域标准化的注意事项
Caveats for the journal and field normalizations in the CWTS ("Leiden") evaluations of research performance
摘要：
莱顿大学科学技术研究中心主张参照世界平均水平，使用具体的标准化来评估研究绩效。期刊引用分数（JCS）和领域引用分数（FCS）是研究小组或研究人员的平均值，然后将这些值用作每篇出版物（CPP）的（平均）引用数。因此，该归一化基于除以两个平均值。此过程仅在基础正态分布的情况下生成合法指标。考虑到所研究的偏态分布，应将观察值与预期值取平均值，并首先对每份出版物进行划分。我们显示了莱顿归一化最近的评估，我们碰巧有机会获得的基础数据的影响。
英文摘要：
The Center for Science and Technology Studies at Leiden University advocates the use of specific normalizations for assessing research performance with reference to a world average. The Journal Citation Score (JCS) and Field Citation Score (FCS) are averaged for the research group or individual researcher under study, and then these values are used as denominators of the (mean) Citations per publication (CPP). Thus, this normalization is based on dividing two averages. This procedure only generates a legitimate indicator in the case of underlying normal distributions. Given the skewed distributions under study, one should average the observed versus expected values which are to be divided first for each publication. We show the effects of the Leiden normalization for a recent evaluation where we happened to have access to the underlying data.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
