Citation Statistics

TL;DR

This paper critically examines the use of citation data in research assessment, highlighting misconceptions about their objectivity and accuracy, and discusses the potential misuse of bibliometric indicators.

Contribution

It provides a critical analysis of citation statistics, challenging the assumption that they are inherently objective and suitable for research evaluation.

Findings

Citation data are often misused in research assessment.

Simple citation metrics do not necessarily reflect research quality.

Reliance on citation statistics can lead to flawed evaluations.

Abstract

This is a report about the use and misuse of citation data in the assessment of scientific research. The idea that research assessment must be done using ``simple and objective'' methods is increasingly prevalent today. The ``simple and objective'' methods are broadly interpreted as bibliometrics, that is, citation data and the statistics derived from them. There is a belief that citation statistics are inherently more accurate because they substitute simple numbers for complex judgments, and hence overcome the possible subjectivity of peer review. But this belief is unfounded.