Credit where credit's due: Accounting for co-authorship in citation counts

34Citations
Citations of this article
69Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

I propose a new method (Pareto weights) to objectively attribute citations to co-authors. Previous methods either profess ignorance about the seniority of co-authors (egalitarian weights) or are based in an ad hoc way on the order of authors (rank weights). Pareto weights are based on the respective citation records of the co-authors. Pareto weights are proportional to the probability of observing the number of citations obtained. Assuming a Pareto distribution, such weights can be computed with a simple, closed-form equation but require a few iterations and data on a scholar, her co-authors, and her co-authors' co-authors. The use of Pareto weights is illustrated with a group of prominent economists. In this case, Pareto weights are very different from rank weights. Pareto weights are more similar to egalitarian weights but can deviate up to a quarter in either direction (for reasons that are intuitive). © 2011 The Author(s).

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Tol, R. S. J. (2011). Credit where credit’s due: Accounting for co-authorship in citation counts. Scientometrics, 89(1), 291–299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0451-5

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free