首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 138 毫秒
1.
An expert ranking of forestry journals was compared with Journal Impact Factors and h-indices computed from the ISI Web of Science and internet-based data. Citations reported by Google Scholar offer an efficient way to rank all journals objectively, in a manner consistent with other indicators. This h-index exhibited a high correlation with the Journal Impact Factor (r = 0.92), but is not confined to journals selected by any particular commercial provider. A ranking of 180 forestry journals is presented, on the basis of this index.  相似文献   

2.
In the present paper the Percentage Rank Position (PRP) index concluding from the principle of Similar Distribution of Information Impact in different fields of science (Vinkler, 2013), is suggested to assess journals in different research fields comparatively. The publications in the journals dedicated to a field are ranked by citation frequency, and the PRP-index of the papers in the elite set of the field is calculated. The PRP-index relates the citation rank number of the paper to the total number of papers in the corresponding set. The sum of the PRP-index of the elite papers in a journal, PRP(j,F) may represent the eminence of the journal in the field. The non-parametric and non-dimensional PRP(j,F) index of journals is believed to be comparable across fields.  相似文献   

3.
Citation based approaches, such as the impact factor and h-index, have been used to measure the influence or impact of journals for journal rankings. A survey of the related literature for different disciplines shows that the level of correlation between these citation based approaches is domain dependent. We analyze the correlation between the impact factors and h-indices of the top ranked computer science journals for five different subjects. Our results show that the correlation between these citation based approaches is very low. Since using a different approach can result in different journal rankings, we further combine the different results and then re-rank the journals using a combination method. These new ranking results can be used as a reference for researchers to choose their publication outlets.  相似文献   

4.
Research was undertaken that examined what, if any, correlation there was between the h-index and rankings by peer assessment, and what correlation there was between the 2008 UK RAE rankings and the collective h-index of submitting departments. About 100 international scholars in Library and Information Science were ranked by their peers on the quality of their work. These rankings were correlated with the h and g scores the scholars had achieved. The results showed that there was a correlation between their median rankings and the indexes. The 2008 RAE grade point averages (GPA) achieved by departments from three UoAs – Anthropology, Library and Information Management and Pharmacy were compared with each of their collective h and g index scores. Results were mixed, with a strong correlation between pharmacy departments and index scores, followed by library and information management to anthropology where negative and non-significant results were found. Taken together, the findings from the research indicate that individual ranking by peer assessment and their h-index or variants was generally good. Results for the RAE 2008 gave correlations between GPA and successive versions of the h-index which varied in strength, except for anthropology where, it is suggested detailed cited reference searches must be undertaken to maximise citation counts.  相似文献   

5.
This study describes the meaning of and the formula for S-index, which is a novel evaluation index based on the number of citations of each article in a particular journal and the rank of the article according to the number of citations. This study compares S-index with Impact Factor (IF), which is the most well-known evaluation index, using the Korea Citation Index data. It is shown that S-index is positively correlated with the number of articles published in a journal. Tapered h-index (hT-index), which is based on all articles of a journal like S-index, is compared with S-index. It is shown that there is a very strong positive correlation between S-index and hT-index. Although S-index is similar to hT-index, S-index has a slightly better differentiating power and ranks the journal with evenly cited articles higher.  相似文献   

6.
In the present work we introduce a modification of the h-index for multi-authored papers with contribution based author name ranking. The modified h-index is denoted by hmc-index. It employs the framework of the hm-index, which in turn is a straightforward modification of the Hirsch index, proposed by Schreiber. To retain the merit of requiring no additional rearrangement of papers in the hm-index and in order to overcome its shortage of benefiting secondary authors at the expense of primary authors, hmc-index uses combined credit allocation (CCA) to replace fractionalized counting in the hm-index. The hm-index is a special form of hmc-index and fits for papers with equally important authors or alphabetically ordered authorship. There is a possibility of an author of lower contribution to the whole scientific community obtaining a higher hmc-index. Rational hmc-index, denoted by hmcr-index, can avoid it. A fictitious example as a model case and two empirical cases are analyzed. The correlations of the hmcr-index with the h-index and its several variants considering multiple co-authorship are inspected with 30 researchers’ citation data. The results show that the hmcr-index is more reasonable for authors with different contributions. A researcher playing more important roles in significant work will obtain higher hmcr-index.  相似文献   

7.
The definition of the g-index is as arbitrary as that of the h-index, because the threshold number g2 of citations to the g most cited papers can be modified by a prefactor at one's discretion, thus taking into account more or less of the highly cited publications within a dataset. In a case study I investigate the citation records of 26 physicists and show that the prefactor influences the ranking in terms of the generalized g-index less than for the generalized h-index. I propose specifically a prefactor of 2 for the g-index, because then the resulting values are of the same order of magnitude as for the common h-index. In this way one can avoid the disadvantage of the original g-index, namely that the values are usually substantially larger than for the h-index and thus the precision problem is substantially larger; while the advantages of the g-index over the h-index are kept. Like for the generalized h-index, also for the generalized g-index different prefactors might be more useful for investigations which concentrate only on top scientists with high citation frequencies or on junior researchers with small numbers of citations.  相似文献   

8.
A variant of the h-index, named the stochastic h-index, is proposed. This new index is obtained by adding to the h-index the probability, under a specific stochastic model, that the h-index will increase by one or more within a given time interval. The stochastic h-index thus extends the h-index to the real line and has a direct interpretation as the distance to the next higher index value. We show how the stochastic h-index can be evaluated and compare it with other variants of the h-index which purportedly indicate the distance to a higher h-index.  相似文献   

9.
The arbitrariness of the h-index becomes evident, when one requires q × h instead of h citations as the threshold for the definition of the index, thus changing the size of the core of the most influential publications of a dataset. I analyze the citation records of 26 physicists in order to determine how much the prefactor q influences the ranking. Likewise, the arbitrariness of the highly-cited-publications indicator is due to the threshold value, given either as an absolute number of citations or as a percentage of highly cited papers. The analysis of the 26 citation records shows that the changes in the rankings in dependence on these thresholds are rather large and comparable with the respective changes for the h-index.  相似文献   

10.
This article reviews the debate within bibliometrics regarding the h-index. Despite its popularity as a decision-making tool within higher education, the h-index has become increasingly controversial among specialists. Fundamental questions remain regarding the extent to which the h-index actually measures what it sets out to measure. Unfortunately, many aspects of this debate are confined to highly technical discussions in specialised journals. This article explains in simple terms exactly why a growing number of bibliometricians are sceptical that the h-index is a useful tool for evaluating researchers. It concludes that librarians should be cautious in their recommendations regarding this metric, at least until better evidence becomes available.  相似文献   

11.
We show that the h-index, g-index, ψ-index, and p-index, are related through the inequalities: h ≤ p ≤ g ≤ ψ. Moreover, this relation is proved theoretically in the mathematical framework of Lotkaian informetrics and is verified empirically by using two datasets from the Web of Science in the fields of electrochemistry and gerontology. For quantifying their relations, we estimate the g-index, ψ-index, and their cores and ratios of cores via a second-order Taylor series when the e-index, h-index, and C1 (the maximum number of citations received by a paper) are known. Then we find for the two empirical cases, that ratios of cores and average citations are approximately stable. Compared with the g-index, the offset-ability of the h-index decreases by 20% but the average citations increase by 20%. A similar observation holds for the comparison of the g-index and ψ-index. To explore the possible applications of cores of different indices, we apply them to extract the core structure of a network. The h-core is the most efficient, while the ψ-core includes more nodes with high betweenness.  相似文献   

12.
In this paper we attempt to assess the impact of journals in the field of forestry, in terms of bibliometric data, by providing an evaluation of forestry journals based on data envelopment analysis (DEA). In addition, based on the results of the conducted analysis, we provide suggestions for improving the impact of the journals in terms of widely accepted measures of journal citation impact, such as the journal impact factor (IF) and the journal h-index. More specifically, by modifying certain inputs associated with the productivity of forestry journals, we have illustrated how this method could be utilized to raise their efficiency, which in terms of research impact can then be translated into an increase of their bibliometric indices, such as the h-index, IF or eigenfactor score.  相似文献   

13.
We axiomatize the well-known Hirsch index (h-index), which evaluates researcher productivity and impact on a field, and formalize a new axiom called head-independence. Under head-independence, a decrease, to some extent, in the number of citations of “frequently cited papers” has no effect on the index. Together with symmetry and axiom D, head-independence uniquely characterizes the h-index on a certain domain of indices. Some relationships between our axiomatization and those in the literature are also investigated.  相似文献   

14.
The process of assessing individual authors should rely upon a proper aggregation of reliable and valid papers’ quality metrics. Citations are merely one possible way to measure appreciation of publications. In this study we propose some new, SJR- and SNIP-based indicators, which not only take into account the broadly conceived popularity of a paper (manifested by the number of citations), but also other factors like its potential, or the quality of papers that cite a given publication. We explore the relation and correlation between different metrics and study how they affect the values of a real-valued generalized h-index calculated for 11 prominent scientometricians. We note that the h-index is a very unstable impact function, highly sensitive for applying input elements’ scaling. Our analysis is not only of theoretical significance: data scaling is often performed to normalize citations across disciplines. Uncontrolled application of this operation may lead to unfair and biased (toward some groups) decisions. This puts the validity of authors assessment and ranking using the h-index into question. Obviously, a good impact function to be used in practice should not be as much sensitive to changing input data as the analyzed one.  相似文献   

15.
This study presents a unique approach in investigating the knowledge diffusion structure for the field of data quality through an analysis of the main paths. We study a dataset of 1880 papers to explore the knowledge diffusion path, using citation data to build the citation network. The main paths are then investigated and visualized via social network analysis. This paper takes three different main path analyses, namely local, global, and key-route, to depict the knowledge diffusion path and additionally implements the g-index and h-index to evaluate the most important journals and researchers in the data quality domain.  相似文献   

16.
The definitions of the rational and real-valued variants of the h-index and g-index are reviewed. It is shown how they can be obtained both graphically and by calculation. Formulae are derived expressing the exact relations between the h-variants and between the g-variants. Subsequently these relations are examined. In a citation context the real h-index is often, but not always, smaller than the rational h-index. It is also shown that the relation between the real and the rational g-index depends on the number of citations of the article ranked g + 1. Maximum differences between h, hr and hrat on the one hand and between g, gr and grat on the other are determined.  相似文献   

17.
Based on the rank-order citation distribution of e.g. a researcher, one can define certain points on this distribution, hereby summarizing the citation performance of this researcher. Previous work of Glänzel and Schubert defined these so-called “characteristic scores and scales” (CSS), based on average citation data of samples of this ranked publication–citation list.In this paper we will define another version of CSS, based on diverse h-type indices such as the h-index, the g-index, the Kosmulski's h(2)-index and the g-variant of it, the g(2)-index.Mathematical properties of these new CSS are proved in a Lotkaian framework. These CSS also provide an improvement of the single h-type indices in the sense that they give h-type index values for different parts of the ranked publication–citation list.  相似文献   

18.
Based on an idea by Kosmulski, Franceschini et al. (2012, Scientometrics 92(3), 621–641) propose to classify a publication as “successful” when it receives more citations than a specific comparison term (CT). In the intention of the authors CT should be a suitable estimate of the number of citations that a publication – in a certain scientific context and period of time – should potentially achieve. According to this definition, the success-index is defined as the number of successful papers, among a group of publications examined, such as those associated to a scientist or a journal. In the first part of the paper, the success-index is recalled, discussing its properties and limitations. Next, relying on the theory of Information Production Processes (IPPs), an informetric model of the index is formulated, for a better comprehension of the index and its properties. Particular emphasis is given to a theoretical sensitivity analysis of the index.  相似文献   

19.
In this paper a generalisation of the h-index and g-index is given on the basis of non-negative real-valued functionals defined on subspaces of the vector space generated by the ordered samples. Several Hirsch-type measures are defined and their basic properties are analysed. Empirical properties are illustrated using examples from the micro- and meso-level. Among these measures, the h-index proved the most, the arithmetic and geometric g-indices, the least robust measures. The μ-index and the harmonic g-index provide more balanced results and are still robust enough.  相似文献   

20.
Hirsch's h-index seeks to give a single number that in some sense summarizes an author's research output and its impact. Essentially, the h-index seeks to identify the most productive core of an author's output in terms of most received citations. This most productive set we refer to as the Hirsch core, or h-core. Jin's A-index relates to the average impact, as measured by the average number of citations, of this “most productive” core. In this paper, we investigate both the total productivity of the Hirsch core – what we term the size of the h-core – and the A-index using a previously proposed stochastic model for the publication/citation process, emphasising the importance of the dynamic, or time-dependent, nature of these measures. We also look at the inter-relationships between these measures. Numerical investigations suggest that the A-index is a linear function of time and of the h-index, while the size of the Hirsch core has an approximate square-law relationship with time, and hence also with the A-index and the h-index.  相似文献   

设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号