  Two commonly used ideas in the development of citation-based research
performance indicators are the idea of normalizing citation counts based on a
field classification scheme and the idea of recursive citation weighing (like
in PageRank-inspired indicators). We combine these two ideas in a single
indicator, referred to as the recursive mean normalized citation score
indicator, and we study the validity of this indicator. Our empirical analysis
shows that the proposed indicator is highly sensitive to the field
classification scheme that is used. The indicator also has a strong tendency to
reinforce biases caused by the classification scheme. Based on these
observations, we advise against the use of indicators in which the idea of
normalization based on a field classification scheme and the idea of recursive
citation weighing are combined.
