A discussion of measuring the top-1 percent most-highly cited publications: Quality and impact of Chinese papers
Caroline S. Wagner, Lin Zhang, Loet Leydesdorff

TL;DR
This paper examines the measurement of top-1 percent highly cited publications, highlighting how field normalization affects perceived quality and impact of Chinese scientific output compared to Western countries.
Contribution
It reveals that normalization methods significantly influence assessments of scientific quality, showing China’s strengths in social sciences and the US in biomedical fields.
Findings
China overtook the US in top 1 percent publications in 2019
Field normalization affects rankings of scientific quality
China outperforms the US in Business and Finance fields
Abstract
The top 1 percent most highly cited articles are watched closely as the vanguards of the sciences. Using Web of Science data, one can find that China had overtaken the USA in the relative participation in the top 1 percent in 2019, after outcompeting the EU on this indicator in 2015. However, this finding contrasts with repeated reports of Western agencies that the quality of Chinese output in science is lagging other advanced nations, even as it has caught up in numbers of articles. The difference between the results presented here and the previous results depends mainly upon field normalizations, which classify source journals by discipline. Average citation rates of these subsets are commonly used as a baseline so that one can compare among disciplines. However, the expected value of the top 1 percent of a sample of N papers is N 100, ceteris paribus. Using the average citation rates…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
Topicsscientometrics and bibliometrics research
