VALIDATION OF BIBLIOMETRIC INDICATORS IN THE FIELD OF MATHEMATICS

Bibliometric analyses of scientific publications provide quantitative information that enables evaluators to obtain a useful picture of a te am's research visibility. In combination with peer judgements and othe r qualitative background knowledge, these analyses can serve as a basi s for discussions about research performance quality. However, many ma thematicians are not convinced that citation counts do in fact provide useful information in the field of mathematics. According to these ma thematicians, citation and publication habits differ completely from s cholarly fields such as chemistry or physics. Therefore, it is impossi ble to derive valid information regarding research performance from ci tation counts. The aim of this study is to obtain more insight into th e significance of citation-based indicators in the field of mathematic s. To which extent do citation-scores mirror to the opinions of expert s concerning the quality of a paper or a journal? A survey was conduct ed to answer this question. Top journals, as qualified by experts, rec eive significantly higher citation rates than good journals. These goo d journals, in rum, have significantly higher scores than journals wit h the qualification less good. Top publications, recorded in the ISI d atabase. receive on the average 15 times more citations than the mean score within the field of mathematics as a whole. In conclusion, the e xperts' views on top publications or top journals correspond very well to bibliometric indicators based on citation counts.