h-index Research in Scientometrics: A Summary

Lutz Bornmann

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1407.2932

2014-07-10

Abstract:A Letter to the Editor shortly summing up ten or so years of research into the h-index.

Digital Libraries

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Forewarned Is Forearmed: The h-Index as a Scientometric

Mohammad Javed Ali

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08820538.2021.1894889

2021-02-17

Seminars in Ophthalmology

Abstract:The author-level scientometrics is a mélange of several indices, and the 'h-index' or the 'Hirsch-index' is at its forefront. Jorge E. Hirst proposed the concept of h-index in 2005 as a broad measure of the impact of a researcher's scientific contributions and as a possibly unbiased way to compare individuals competing for the same resources.1 It is calculated as the 'h' number of papers having at least 'h' number of citations. For example, if a researcher has an h-index of 10, it means 10 of his papers have at least 10 citations or more. Hirsch, in 2007 put forth his seminal finding that the h-index is better than several other metrics in predicting future scientific achievement.2

ophthalmology
Quantitative analysis of automatic performance evaluation systems based on the h-index

Marc P. Hauer,Xavier C. R. Hofmann,Tobias D. Krafft,Katharina A. Zweig

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03407-7

IF: 3.801

2020-03-14

Scientometrics

Abstract:Abstract Since the h -index has been invented, it is the most frequently discussed bibliometric value and one of the most commonly used metrics to quantify a researcher’s scientific output. The more it is increasingly gaining popularity to use the metric as an indication of the quality of a job applicant or an employee the more important it is to assure its correctitude. Many platforms offer the h -index of a scientist as a service, sometimes without the explicit knowledge of the respective person. In this article we show that looking up the h -index for a researcher on the five most commonly used platforms, namely AMiner, Google Scholar, ResearchGate, Scopus and Web of Science, results in a variance that is in many cases as large as the average value. This is due to the varying definitions of what a scientific article is, the underlying data basis, and different qualities of the entity recognition problem. To perform our study, we crawled the h -index of the worlds top researchers according to two different rankings, all the Nobel Prize laureates except Literature and Peace, and the teaching staff of the computer science department of the TU Kaiserslautern Germany with whom we additionally computed their h -index manually. Thus we showed that the individual h -indices differ to an alarming extent between the platforms. We observed that researchers with an extraordinary high h -index and researchers with an index appropriate to the scientific career path and the respective scientific field are affected alike by these problems.

information science & library science,computer science, interdisciplinary applications
Does the Hα-Index Reinforce the Matthew Effect in Science? the Introduction of Agent-Based Simulations into Scientometrics

Lutz Bornmann,Christian Ganser,Alexander Tekles,Loet Leydesdorff

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00008

2019-01-01

Quantitative Science Studies

Abstract:Recently, Hirsch (2019a) proposed a new variant of the h-index called the hα-index. The hα-index was criticized by Leydesdorff, Bornmann, and Opthof (2019) . One of their most important points is that the index reinforces the Matthew effect in science. The Matthew effect was defined by Merton (1968) as follows: “the Matthew effect consists in the accruing of greater increments of recognition for particular scientific contributions to scientists of considerable repute and the withholding of such recognition from scientists who have not yet made their mark” (p. 58). We follow up on the point about the Matthew effect in the current study by using a recently developed Stata command (h_index) and R package (hindex), which can be used to simulate h-index and hα-index applications in research evaluation. The user can investigate under which conditions hα reinforces the Matthew effect. The results of our study confirm what Leydesdorff et al. (2019) expected: The hα-index reinforces the Matthew effect. This effect can be intensified if strategic behavior of the publishing scientists and cumulative advantage effects are additionally considered in the simulation.
A theoretical model of the relationship between the h-index and other simple citation indicators

Lucio Bertoli-Barsotti,Tommaso Lando

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2351-9

IF: 3.801

2017-03-20

Scientometrics

Abstract:Of the existing theoretical formulas for the h-index, those recently suggested by Burrell (J Informetr 7:774–783, 2013b) and by Bertoli-Barsotti and Lando (J Informetr 9(4):762–776, 2015) have proved very effective in estimating the actual value of the h-index Hirsch (Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102:16569–16572, 2005), at least at the level of the individual scientist. These approaches lead (or may lead) to two slightly different formulas, being based, respectively, on a “standard” and a “shifted” version of the geometric distribution. In this paper, we review the genesis of these two formulas—which we shall call the “basic” and “improved” Lambert-W formula for the h-index—and compare their effectiveness with that of a number of instances taken from the well-known Glänzel–Schubert class of models for the h-index (based, instead, on a Paretian model) by means of an empirical study. All the formulas considered in the comparison are “ready-to-use”, i.e., functions of simple citation indicators such as: the total number of publications; the total number of citations; the total number of cited paper; the number of citations of the most cited paper. The empirical study is based on citation data obtained from two different sets of journals belonging to two different scientific fields: more specifically, 231 journals from the area of “Statistics and Mathematical Methods” and 100 journals from the area of “Economics, Econometrics and Finance”, totaling almost 100,000 and 20,000 publications, respectively. The citation data refer to different publication/citation time windows, different types of “citable” documents, and alternative approaches to the analysis of the citation process (“prospective” and “retrospective”). We conclude that, especially in its improved version, the Lambert-W formula for the h-index provides a quite robust and effective ready-to-use rule that should be preferred to other known formulas if one’s goal is (simply) to derive a reliable estimate of the h-index.

information science & library science,computer science, interdisciplinary applications
The h-index formalism

Leo Egghe,Ronald Rousseau

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03699-9

IF: 3.801

2020-09-14

Scientometrics

Abstract:This article provides an overview of the development of the h-index formalism. We begin with the original formulation as provided by Hirsch and move on to the latest versions. In this we show how the h-index formalism has evolved over time. Lesser known versions, in particular the continuous version of the h-index is brought to the front. We also discuss the Prathap–Kosmulski–Schubert successive h-indices. As announced in the title we focus on the h-index formalism, omitting generalizations, such as the g-index, and applications in research assessment.

information science & library science,computer science, interdisciplinary applications
Count Highly-Cited Papers Instead of Papers with H Citations: Use Normalized Citation Counts and Compare “like with Like”!

Lutz Bornmann,Loet Leydesdorff

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2682-1

IF: 3.801

2018-01-01

Scientometrics

Abstract:Teixeira da Silva and Dobránszki (Scientometrics. 10.1007/s11192-018-2680-3, 2018) describe practical problems in using the h-index for the purpose of research evaluation. For example, they discuss the h-index differences among the bibliometric databases. In this Letter to the Editor, we argue for abstaining from using the h-index. One can use normalized indicators instead.
A case study of the Hirsch index for 26 non-prominent physicists

Michael Schreiber

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/andp.200710252

2007-08-29

Abstract:The h index was introduced by Hirsch to quantify an individual's scientific research output. It has been widely used in different fields to show the relevance of the research work of prominent scientists. I have worked out 26 practical cases of physicists which are not so prominent. Therefore this case study should be more relevant to discuss various features of the Hirsch index which are interesting or disturbing or both for the more average situation. In particular, I investigate quantitatively some pitfalls in the evaluation and the influence of self-citations.

Physics and Society
An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output

J. E. Hirsch

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102

IF: 11.1

2005-11-07

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract:I propose the index h , defined as the number of papers with citation number ≥ h , as a useful index to characterize the scientific output of a researcher.
Generalized Hirsch h-index for disclosing latent facts in citation networks

Antonis Sidiropoulos,Dimitrios Katsaros,Yannis Manolopoulos

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1722-z

IF: 3.801

2007-06-17

Scientometrics

Abstract:What is the value of a scientist and its impact upon the scientific thinking? How can we measure the prestige of a journal or a conference? The evaluation of the scientific work of a scientist and the estimation of the quality of a journal or conference has long attracted significant interest, due to the benefits by obtaining an unbiased and fair criterion. Although it appears to be simple, defining a quality metric is not an easy task. To overcome the disadvantages of the present metrics used for ranking scientists and journals, J. E. Hirsch proposed a pioneering metric, the now famous h-index. In this article we demonstrate several inefficiencies of this index and develop a pair of generalizations and effective variants of it to deal with scientist ranking and publication forum ranking. The new citation indices are able to disclose trendsetters in scientific research, as well as researchers that constantly shape their field with their influential work, no matter how old they are. We exhibit the effectiveness and the benefits of the new indices to unfold the full potential of the h-index, with extensive experimental results obtained from the DBLP, a widely known on-line digital library.

information science & library science,computer science, interdisciplinary applications
Which h-index? An exploration within the Web of Science

Guangyuan Hu,Lei Wang,Rong Ni,Weishu Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03425-5

IF: 3.801

2020-04-04

Scientometrics

Abstract:The h-index has attracted wide attention from both scientometricians and science policy makers since it was proposed in 2005. Advocates champion h-index for its simplicity embracing both quantity and quality, while also express concern about its abuse in research evaluation practices and database-dependence attribute. We argue that it is increasingly important to calculate and interpret the h-index precisely along with the rapid evolution of bibliographic databases. In memory of Dr. Judit Bar-Ilan, we join the h-index discussion in Scientometrics by further probing a similar "which h-index" question via comparing different versions of h-index within the Web of Science. In this article we put forward the reasons of different WoS h-indices from two perspectives, which are often neglected by bibliometric studies. We suggest that users should specify the details of data sources of h-index calculation for research promotion and evaluation practices.

information science & library science,computer science, interdisciplinary applications
h-index and its alternative: A Review

Anand Bihari,Sudhakar Tripathi,Akshay Deepak

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1811.03308

2018-11-08

Abstract:In recent years, several Scientometrics and Bibliometrics indicators were proposed to evaluate the scientific impact of individuals, institutions, colleges, universities and research teams. The h-index gives a major breakthrough in the research community to evaluate the scientific impact of an individual. It got a lot of attention due to its simplicity and several other indicators were proposed to extend the properties of h-index as well as to overcome shortcomings of h-index. In this literature review, we have discussed the advantages and limitations of almost all Scientometrics as well as Bibliometrics indicators which have been categorized into seven categories :(i) Complement of h-index, (ii) Based on total number of authors, (iii) Based on publication age, (iv) Combination of two indices, (v) Based on excess citation count, (vi) Based on total publication count, (vii) Based on other variants. The main objective of this article is to study all those indicators which have been proposed to evaluate the scientific impact of an individual researcher or a group of researchers.

Digital Libraries
Top Cited Articles in Adsorption Research Using Y-Index

Hui-Zhen Fu,Yuh-Shan Ho

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvt018

2014-01-01

Research Evaluation

Abstract:A bibliometric index called Y-index (j, h) is developed, taking the prominent first author and corresponding author positions into account for evaluation and comparison of scientific productivity. Y-index contained two parameters: publication performance j, which is related to publication quantity, and publication character h, which describes the proportion of corresponding author publications (RP) to first author publications (FP). The top cited articles with at least 100 citations from 1900 to 2012 were selected to examine the Y-index for the evaluation. Y-index and three indicators, number of total publications, FP and RP, were compared. The main contributors of authors, institutions and countries and their contribution characters were revealed by Y-index. Results showed that the topmost authors were more likely to being designated as the corresponding authors, and their contribution characters varied widely. Most institutions and countries had a balance of FP and RP. Y-index that accredits the important collaborators with weighted and comprehensive credit might be a better choice for the evaluation.
A review on h-index and its alternative indices

Anand Bihari,Sudhakar Tripathi,Akshay Deepak

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515211014478

2021-05-31

Journal of Information Science

Abstract:In recent years, several scientometrics and bibliometrics indicators were proposed to evaluate the scientific impact of individuals, institutions, colleges, universities and research teams. The h-index gives a breakthrough in the research community for assessing the scientific impact of an individual. It got a lot of attention due to its simplicity, and several other indicators were proposed to extend the properties of the h-index and to overcome its shortcomings. In this literature review, we have discussed the advantages and limitations of almost all scientometrics and bibliometrics indicators, which have been categorised into seven categories based on their properties: (1) complement of h-index, (2) based on total number of authors, (3) based on publication age, (4) combination of two indices, (5) based on excess citation count, (6) based on total publication count and (7) based on other variants. The primary objective of this article is to study all those indicators which have been proposed to evaluate the scientific impact of an individual researcher or a group of researchers.

computer science, information systems,information science & library science
On the meaning of the h-index

S. Redner

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/2010/03/L03005

2010-02-04

Abstract:The h-index -- the value for which an individual has published at least h papers with at least h citations -- has become a popular metric to assess the citation impact of scientists. As already noted in the original work of Hirsch and as evidenced from data of a representative sample of physicists, sqrt{c} scales as h, where c is the total number citations to an individual. Thus sqrt{c} appears to be equivalent to the h index. As a further check of this equivalence, the distribution of the ratio s=sqrt{c}/2h for this sample is sharply peaked about 1. The outliers in this distribution reveal fundamentally different types of individual publication records.

Data Analysis, Statistics and Probability,Digital Libraries,Physics and Society
The h-Index: Understanding its predictors, significance, and criticism

Himel Mondal,Kishore Kumar Deepak,Manisha Gupta,Raman Kumar

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_1613_23

2023-11-01

Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care

Abstract:The h-index is an author-level scientometric index used to gauge the significance of a researcher's work. The index is determined by taking the number of publications and the number of times these publications have been cited by others. Although it is widely used in academia, many authors find its calculation confusing. There are websites such as Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science (WOS), and Vidwan that provide the h-index of an author. As this metrics is frequently used by recruiting agency and grant approving authority to see the output of researchers, the authors need to know in-depth about it. In this article, we describe both the manual calculation method of the h-index and the details of websites that provide an automated calculation. We discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the h-index and the factors that determine the h-index of an author. Overall, this article serves as a comprehensive guide for novice authors seeking to understand the h-index and its significance in academia.
On the "persistency" of scientific publications: introducing an h-index for journals

Roberto Piazza

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1705.09390

2017-05-23

Abstract:What do we really mean by a "good" scientific journal? Do we care more about the short-time impact of our papers, or about the chance that they will still be read and cited on the long run? Here I show that, by regarding a journal as a "virtual scientist" that can be attributed a time-dependent Hirsch h-index, we can introduce a parameter that, arguably, better captures the "persistency" of a scientific publication. Curiously, however, this parameter seems to depend above all on the "thickness" of a journal.

Physics and Society,Digital Libraries
H-index and research evaluation: A suggested set of components for developing a comprehensive author-level index

Ali Norouzi,Parastoo Parsaei-Mohammadi,Firoozeh Zare-Farashbandi,Elahe Zare-Farashbandi,Ehsan Geraei

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515241293761

2024-11-27

Journal of Information Science

Abstract:Journal of Information Science, Ahead of Print. The H-index has been investigated in various studies; this index has many strengths that have made it popular. However, it also has weaknesses, due to which other indicators have been developed. This study aims to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the H-index and provide the minimum set of necessary components for developing a comprehensive author-level index. In this systematic literature review, Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, Emerald, and ProQuest databases were searched to identify relevant studies. From the number of 14,253 retrieved studies, after two stages of screening, 81 studies were selected according to the eligibility criteria for data extraction. The findings of the study led to the identification of 15 strengths in the three categories of Quality Features, Simplicity, and Suitability, and 13 weaknesses in the six categories of Publications, Citations, Academic Age, Author Credit Allocation, Variety of Fields, and mathematical calculation for H-index. Finally, 28 components were identified as the minimum set of necessary components to develop a comprehensive author-level index to help evaluate researchers more realistically and fairly. The minimum components that need to be considered in developing a comprehensive author-level index can be proposed as follows: Quality Features, Simplicity, Suitability, Publications, Citations, Academic Age, Author Credit Allocation, Variety of Fields, and mathematical calculation.

computer science, information systems,information science & library science
A Case Study of the Modified Hirsch Index hm Accounting for Multiple Co-authors

Michael Schreiber

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21057

2009-03-28

Abstract:J. E. Hirsch (2005) introduced the h-index to quantify an individual's scientific research output by the largest number h of a scientist's papers, that received at least h citations. This so-called Hirsch index can be easily modified to take multiple co-authorship into account by counting the papers fractionally according to (the inverse of) the number of authors. I have worked out 26 empirical cases of physicists to illustrate the effect of this modification. Although the correlation between the original and the modified Hirsch index is relatively strong, the arrangement of the datasets is significantly different depending on whether they are put into order according to the values of either the original or the modified index.

Physics and Society
Researchers’ attitudes towards the h-index on Twitter 2007–2020: criticism and acceptance

Mike Thelwall,Kayvan Kousha

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03961-8

IF: 3.801

2021-04-26

Scientometrics

Abstract:The h-index is an indicator of the scientific impact of an academic publishing career. Its hybrid publishing/citation nature and inherent bias against younger researchers, women, people in low resourced countries, and those not prioritizing publishing arguably give it little value for most formal and informal research evaluations. Nevertheless, it is well-known by academics, used in some promotion decisions, and is prominent in bibliometric databases, such as Google Scholar. In the context of this apparent conflict, it is important to understand researchers' attitudes towards the h-index. This article used public tweets in English to analyse how scholars discuss the h-index in public: is it mentioned, are tweets about it positive or negative, and has interest decreased since its shortcomings were exposed? The January 2021 Twitter Academic Research initiative was harnessed to download all English tweets mentioning the h-index from the 2006 start of Twitter until the end of 2020. The results showed a constantly increasing number of tweets. Whilst the most popular tweets unapologetically used the h-index as an indicator of research performance, 28.5% of tweets were critical of its simplistic nature and others joked about it (8%). The results suggest that interest in the h-index is still increasing online despite scientists willing to evaluate the h-index in public tending to be critical. Nevertheless, in limited situations it may be effective at succinctly conveying the message that a researcher has had a successful publishing career.

information science & library science,computer science, interdisciplinary applications
The i100-index, i1000-index and i10,000-index: expansion and fortification of the Google Scholar h-index for finer-scale citation descriptions and researcher classification

Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03831-9

IF: 3.801

2021-02-06

Scientometrics

Abstract:The Hirsch or h-index continues to be one of the most popular author-based metrics, despite some of its flaws and limitations. In some cases, citations to some academics' work are increasing at a phenomenal pace, and in some exceptional cases such as Highly Cited Researchers (HCRs), whether alive or deceased, citation counts to their work have reached tens or hundreds of thousands, with h-indexes in the hundreds. Although the h-index currently has one additional derivative index, the i10-index, which is a measure of the number of publications with 10 or more citations, the i10-index is clearly not a sufficient differentiating factor for academics with very high citation counts such as HCRs. In this letter, an expansion of this metric is proposed to include an i100-index, an i1000-index, and an i10,000-index, which indicate the number of publications with 100, 1000, or 10,000 or more citations, respectively. These three new, expanded and/or modified metrics that are based on the h-index may assist in more effectively differentiating the top echelon of HCRs or leaders in a specific field of study. The i100-, i1000-, and i10,000-indexes for 10 HCRs (Michel Foucault, Ronald C. Kessler, Graham Colditz, Sigmund Freud, JoAnn E. Manson, Shizuo Akira, Pierre Bourdieu, Robert Langer, Eric Lander, and Bert Vogelstein) were calculated. Limitations to these three new proposed h-index-based indexes are noted.

information science & library science,computer science, interdisciplinary applications

h-index Research in Scientometrics: A Summary

Forewarned Is Forearmed: The h-Index as a Scientometric

Quantitative analysis of automatic performance evaluation systems based on the h-index

Does the Hα-Index Reinforce the Matthew Effect in Science? the Introduction of Agent-Based Simulations into Scientometrics

A theoretical model of the relationship between the h-index and other simple citation indicators

The h-index formalism

Count Highly-Cited Papers Instead of Papers with H Citations: Use Normalized Citation Counts and Compare “like with Like”!

A case study of the Hirsch index for 26 non-prominent physicists

An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output

Generalized Hirsch h-index for disclosing latent facts in citation networks

Which h-index? An exploration within the Web of Science

h-index and its alternative: A Review

Top Cited Articles in Adsorption Research Using Y-Index

A review on h-index and its alternative indices

On the meaning of the h-index

The h-Index: Understanding its predictors, significance, and criticism

On the "persistency" of scientific publications: introducing an h-index for journals

H-index and research evaluation: A suggested set of components for developing a comprehensive author-level index

A Case Study of the Modified Hirsch Index hm Accounting for Multiple Co-authors

Researchers’ attitudes towards the h-index on Twitter 2007–2020: criticism and acceptance

The i100-index, i1000-index and i10,000-index: expansion and fortification of the Google Scholar h-index for finer-scale citation descriptions and researcher classification