Deakin University
Browse

File(s) under permanent embargo

Aggregating different paper quality measures with a generalized h-index

Version 2 2024-06-13, 13:19
Version 1 2019-10-09, 08:32
journal contribution
posted on 2024-06-13, 13:19 authored by M Gagolewski, R Mesiar
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. © 2012 Elsevier Ltd.

History

Journal

Journal of Informetrics

Volume

6

Pagination

566-579

Location

Amsterdam, The Netherlands

ISSN

1751-1577

Language

eng

Publication classification

C1.1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal

Issue

4

Publisher

Elsevier