Search Results
Abstract
It is shown that a Hirsch-type index can be used for assessing single highly cited publications by calculating the h-index of the set of papers citing the work in question. This index measures not only the direct impact of a publication but also its indirect influence through the citing papers.
Abstract
The h-index is becoming a reference tool for career assessment and it is starting to be considered by some agencies and institutions in promotion, allocation, and funding decisions. In areas where h indices tend to be low, individuals with different research accomplishments may end up with the same h. This paper proposes a multidimensional extension of the h index in which the conventional h is only the first component. Additional components of the multidimensional index are obtained by computing the h-index for the subset of papers not considered in the immediately preceding component. Computation of the multidimensional index for 204 faculty members in Departments of Methodology of the Behavioral Sciences in Spain shows that individuals with the same h can indeed be distinguished by their values in the remaining components, and that the strength of the correlation of the second and third components of the multidimensional index with alternative bibliometric indicators is similar to that of the first component (i.e., the original h).
the issues of impact factor, the h -index, the ranking of scholarly journals, and the use of databases and search methods for calculating the various performance indicators (Vanclay 2008a , 2008b , 2011 , 2012 ). As a shorthand, the
Abstract
Ranking of universities has lately received considerable attention. However, ranking of departments would give a higher resolution picture of the distribution of quality within each university. In this work the Hirsch (h) index of each faculty in Greek Chemistry, Chemical Engineering, Materials Science, and Physics departments was calculated using the Web of Science and the mean value was used to rank them. This ranking refers to the research performance of each department and thus is most relevant to its doctoral program. The results seem highly meaningful. If performed on a pan-European basis, such rankings could spur healthy competition and could provide a strong motive for meritocratic hiring practices. Technical difficulties and possible extension of this approach to social science and humanities departments are discussed.
Abstract
Abstract
We develop and discuss the theoretical basis of a new criterion for ranking scientific institutions. Our novel index, which is related to the h-index, provides a metric which removes the size dependence. We discuss its mathematical properties such as merging rules of two sets of papers and analyze the relations between the underlying rank/citation-frequency law and the h-index. The proposed index should be seen as a complement to the h-index, to compare the scientific production of institutions (universities, laboratories or journals) that could be of disparate sizes.
Abstract
The h-index is a recent metric that captures a scholar’s influence. In the current work, it is used to: (1) obtain the h-index scores of the most productive scholars in the Journal of Consumer Research (JCR), and compare these to other elite scholars (including those of the other three premier marketing journals); (2) demonstrate the relationship between the h-indices and total number of citations of the top JCR producers; (3) examine the h-indices of Ferber winners (best interdisciplinary paper based on a doctoral dissertation published in JCR in a given year) and those having received honorable mentions; (4) explore the relationship between a marketing journal’s prestige and the corresponding h-index score of its editor. These varied analyses demonstrate the multitudinous ways in which the h-index can be used when investigating bibliometric phenomena within a given discipline.
Abstract
In this paper some new fields of application of Hirsch-related statistics are presented. Furthermore, so far unrevealed properties of the h-index are analysed in the context of rank-frequency and extreme-value statistics.
Abstract
The ability of g-index and h-index to discriminate between different types of scientists (low producers, big producers, selective scientists and top scientists) is analysed in the area of Natural Resources at the Spanish CSIC (WoS, 1994–2004). Our results show that these indicators clearly differentiate low producers and top scientists, but do not discriminate between selective scientists and big producers. However, g-index is more sensitive than h-index in the assessment of selective scientists, since this type of scientist shows in average a higher g-index/h-index ratio and a better position in g-index rankings than in the h-index ones. Current research suggests that these indexes do not substitute each other but that they are complementary.
Abstract
An individual’s h-index corresponds to the number h of his/her papers that each has at least h citations. When the citation count of an article exceeds h, however, as is the case for the hundreds or even thousands of citations that accompany the most highly cited papers, no additional credit is given (these citations falling outside the so-called “Durfee square”). We propose a new bibliometric index, the “tapered h-index” (h T), that positively enumerates all citations, yet scoring them on an equitable basis with h. The career progression of h T and h are compared for six eminent scientists in contrasting fields. Calculated h T for year 2006 ranged between 44.32 and 72.03, with a corresponding range in h of 26 to 44. We argue that the h T-index is superior to h, both theoretically (it scores all citations), and because it shows smooth increases from year to year as compared with the irregular jumps seen in h. Conversely, the original h-index has the benefit of being conceptually easy to visualise. Qualitatively, the two indices show remarkable similarity (they are closely correlated), such that either can be applied with confidence.
