  Following discussions in 2010 and 2011, scientometric evaluators have
increasingly abandoned relative indicators in favor of comparing observed with
expected citation ratios. The latter method provides parameters with error
values allowing for the statistical testing of differences in citation scores.
A further step would be to proceed to non-parametric statistics (e.g., the
top-10%) given the extreme skewness (non-normality) of the citation
distributions. In response to a plea for returning to relative indicators in
the previous issue of this newsletter, we argue in favor of further progress in
the development of citation impact indicators.
