Leveraging journal citation-based metrics for enhanced university rankings methodology

This paper proposes a novel framework for evaluating research performance in university rankings, utilizing journal citation-based metrics and scholarly output instead of traditional article citation metrics. Through correlation analysis, we compare the proposed metrics with article citation metrics used by prominent ranking systems (THE and QS) and demonstrate significantly higher correlations with established rankings (QS, THE, and ARWU). The proposed metrics exhibit robustness over time and offer a fairer evaluation by emphasizing objective performance and mitigating citation biases. This framework provides institutions with a more accurate benchmarking tool to inform strategic decisions and resource allocation. While acknowledging potential limitations in data availability and the challenge of achieving global consensus, this study contributes to the ongoing discourse on university rankings by advocating for a more equitable and robust evaluation system by balancing diverse metrics and offering more standardized measures.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics
Published
2024-12-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2024.1510169
Citations
1
Primary Topic
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.46
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Leveraging journal citation-based metrics for enhanced university rankings methodology

Sergio Thoumi, Ali Mohammad Ghaddar, Samer S. Saab
1 citations
Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
0.46
article

Leveraging journal citation-based metrics for enhanced university rankings methodology

Sergio Thoumi, Ali Mohammad Ghaddar, Samer S. Saab
article en
1 citations

Abstract

This paper proposes a novel framework for evaluating research performance in university rankings, utilizing journal citation-based metrics and scholarly output instead of traditional article citation metrics. Through correlation analysis, we compare the proposed metrics with article citation metrics used by prominent ranking systems (THE and QS) and demonstrate significantly higher correlations with established rankings (QS, THE, and ARWU). The proposed metrics exhibit robustness over time and offer a fairer evaluation by emphasizing objective performance and mitigating citation biases. This framework provides institutions with a more accurate benchmarking tool to inform strategic decisions and resource allocation. While acknowledging potential limitations in data availability and the challenge of achieving global consensus, this study contributes to the ongoing discourse on university rankings by advocating for a more equitable and robust evaluation system by balancing diverse metrics and offering more standardized measures.

Frontiers in Research Metrics and AnalyticsVol. 9
Lebanese American University (LB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 26%
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
0.46
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Leveraging journal citation-based metrics for enhanced university rankings methodology — Sergio Thoumi, Ali Mohammad Ghaddar, et al. · Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS