L Bornmann, R Mutz, HD Daniel. Do We Need the h Index and Its Variants in Addition to Standard Bibliometric Measures? JASIS&T,2009 60(6):1286–1289
The study investigates whether there is a need for the h index and its variants in addition to standard bibliometric measures (SBMs). There are two types of indices: One type (e.g., h index) describes the most productive core of a scientist’s output and informs about the number of papers in the core.The other type (e.g., a index)
depicts the impact of the papers in the core. In evaluative bibliometric studies, the two dimensions quantity and quality of output are usually assessed using the SBMs “number of publications” (for the quantity dimension) and “total citation counts” (for the impact dimension). The Authors of the study additionally included the SBMs into the factor analysis. The results of the newly calculated analysis indicate that there is a high intercorrelation between “number of publications” and the indices that load substantially on the factor Quantity of the Productive Core as well as between “total citation counts” and the indices that load substantially on the factor Impact of the Productive Core. The authors propose the use of any pair of indicators (one relating to the number of papers in a researcher’s productive core and one relating to the impact of these core papers) as a meaningful approach for comparing scientists
Thanks to J. Hartley
The study investigates whether there is a need for the h index and its variants in addition to standard bibliometric measures (SBMs). There are two types of indices: One type (e.g., h index) describes the most productive core of a scientist’s output and informs about the number of papers in the core.The other type (e.g., a index)
depicts the impact of the papers in the core. In evaluative bibliometric studies, the two dimensions quantity and quality of output are usually assessed using the SBMs “number of publications” (for the quantity dimension) and “total citation counts” (for the impact dimension). The Authors of the study additionally included the SBMs into the factor analysis. The results of the newly calculated analysis indicate that there is a high intercorrelation between “number of publications” and the indices that load substantially on the factor Quantity of the Productive Core as well as between “total citation counts” and the indices that load substantially on the factor Impact of the Productive Core. The authors propose the use of any pair of indicators (one relating to the number of papers in a researcher’s productive core and one relating to the impact of these core papers) as a meaningful approach for comparing scientists
Thanks to J. Hartley
Comments