Search Results
situations there are other, more useful methods, e.g. total number of publications, complete citations or the Hirsch Index (Hirsch 2005 ). Detailed analysis confirms that in history, for frequently-cited authors, all measured indicators are closely
Abstract
This article introduces the generalized Kosmulski-indices as a new family of scientific impact measures for ranking the output of scientific researchers. As special cases, this family contains the well-known Hirsch-index h and the Kosmulski-index h (2). The main contribution is an axiomatic characterization that characterizes every generalized Kosmulski-index in terms of three axioms.
Abstract
In academia, the term “inbreeding” refers to a situation wherein PhDs are employed in the very same institution that trained them during their doctoral studies. Academic inbreeding has a negative perception on the account that it damages both scientific effectiveness and productivity. In this article, the effect of inbreeding on scientific effectiveness is investigated through a case study. This problem is addressed by utilizing Hirsch index as a reliable metric of an academic's scientific productivity. Utilizing the dataset, constructed with academic performance indicators of individuals from the Mechanical and Aeronautical Engineering Departments, of the Turkish Technical Universities, we demonstrate that academic inbreeding has a negative impact on apparent scientific effectiveness through a negative binomial model. This model appears to be the most suitable one for the dataset which is a type of count data. We report chi-square statistics and likelihood ratio test for the parameter alpha. According to the chi-square statistics the model is significant as a whole. The incidence rate ratio for the variable “inbreeding” is estimated to be 0.11 and this ratio tells that, holding all the other factors constant, for the inbred faculty, the h-index is about 89% lower when compared to the non-inbred faculty. Furthermore, there exists negative and statistically significant correlation with an individual's productivity and the percentage of inbred faculty members at the very same department. Excessive practice of inbreeding adversely affects the overall productivity. Decision makers are urged to limit this practice to a minimum in order to foster a vibrant research environment. Furthermore, it is also found that scientific productivity of an individual decreases towards the end of his scientific career.
Abstract
This study applies Prathap’s approach to successive h-indices in order to measure the influence of researcher staff on institutional impact. The twelve most productive Cuban institutions related to the study of the human brain are studied. The Hirsch index was used to measure the impact of the institutional scientific output, using the g-index and R-index as complementary indicators. Prathap’s approach to successive h-indices, based on the author-institution hierarchy, is used to determine the institutional impact through the performance of the researcher staff. The combination of different Hirsch-type indices for institutional evaluation is illustrated.
Hirsch-index of this ranked set is called the single publication H -index of this single publication. This single publication H -index is, hence, a measure of indirect impact of the single publication since it uses citations to the papers that
Abstract
We have developed a method to obtain robust quantitative bibliometric indicators for several thousand scientists. This allows us to study the dependence of bibliometric indicators (such as number of publications, number of citations, Hirsch index...) on the age, position, etc. of CNRS scientists. Our data suggests that the normalized h-index (h divided by the career length) is not constant for scientists with the same productivity but different ages. We also compare the predictions of several bibliometric indicators on the promotions of about 600 CNRS researchers. Contrary to previous publications, our study encompasses most disciplines, and shows that no single indicator is the best predictor for all disciplines. Overall, however, the Hirsch index h provides the least bad correlations, followed by the number of papers published. It is important to realize however that even h is able to recover only half of the actual promotions. The number of citations or the mean number of citations per paper are definitely not good predictors of promotion. Due to space constraints, this paper is a short version of a more detailed article. [JENSEN & AL., 2008B]
Introduction The Hirsch-index (or h-index, Hirsch 2005 ) is now a well-established indicator of impact of an object (journal, author, topic, institute, etc.) (Braun et al. 2005 , 2006 ; Banks 2006 ; van Raan 2006 ). Yet
Introduction The Hirsch-index or h -index is defined for a decreasing sequence of positive numbers. In the original article Hirsch 2005 one has a decreasing sequence of citations to articles (e.g. of a researcher). As such
stochastic model . Journal of Informetrics 1 1 16 – 25 10.1016/j.joi.2006.07.001 . Burrell , QL 2007 Hirsch index or Hirsch rate? Some thoughts arising from Liang's data
Selected characteristics of the authors in the sample: number of papers, number of cited papers, number of citations, average number of citations (per cited paper), Hirsch index, Pareto index, and Shleifer number
