Related papers: Model-based evaluation of scientific impact indica…
What is the value of a scientist and its impact upon the scientific thinking? How can we measure the prestige of a journal or of a conference? The evaluation of the scientific work of a scientist and the estimation of the quality of a…
The launch of Google Scholar Citations and Google Scholar Metrics may provoke a revolution in the research evaluation field as it places within every researchers reach tools that allow bibliometric measuring. In order to alert the research…
In growing numbers, scholars are integrating social media tools like blogs, Twitter, and Mendeley into their professional communications. The online, public nature of these tools exposes and reifies scholarly processes once hidden and…
Ever more frequently, governments have decided to implement policy measures intended to foster and reward excellence in scientific research. This is in fact the intended purpose of national research assessment exercises. These are typically…
The ongoing discussion regarding the utilization of individual research performance for academic hiring, funding allocation, and resource distribution has prompted the need for improved metrics. While traditional measures such as total…
Bibliometric measures of individual scientific achievement are of particular interest if they can be used to predict future achievement. Here we report results of an empirical study of the predictive power of the h-index compared to other…
The ongoing growth in the volume of scientific literature available today precludes researchers from efficiently discerning the relevant from irrelevant content. Researchers are constantly interested in impactful papers, authors and venues…
A researcher collaborating with many groups will normally have more papers (and thus higher citations and $h$-index) than a researcher spending all his/her time working alone or in a small group. While analyzing an author's research merit,…
Metrics based on percentile ranks (PRs) for measuring scholarly impact involves complex treatment because of various defects such as overvaluing or devaluing an object caused by percentile ranking schemes, ignoring precise citation…
The h index is a widely recognized metric for assessing the research impact of scholars, defined as the maximum value h such that the scholar has published h papers each cited at least h times. While it has proven useful measuring…
Bibliometrics plays an increasingly important role in research evaluation. However, no gold standard exists for a set of reliable and valid (field-normalized) impact indicators in research evaluation. This opinion paper recommends that…
We test 16 bibliometric indicators with respect to their validity at the level of the individual researcher by estimating their power to predict later successful researchers. We compare the indicators of a sample of astrophysics researchers…
In the final analysis citation-based indicators are inferior to effective peer review and even peer review is flawed. It is impossible to accurately measure the value or impact of scientific research and a key task of scientometricians…
We present a simple generalization of Hirsch's h-index, Z = \sqrt{h^{2}+C}/\sqrt{5}, where C is the total number of citations. Z is aimed at correcting the potentially excessive penalty made by h on a scientist's highly cited papers,…
The recently proposed Euclidean index offers a novel approach to measure the citation impact of academic authors, in particular as an alternative to the h-index. We test if the index provides new, robust information, not covered by existing…
Over the past decade, national research evaluation exercises, traditionally conducted using the peer review method, have begun opening to bibliometric indicators. The citations received by a publication are assumed as proxy for its quality,…
Researchers are often evaluated by citation-based metrics. Such metrics can inform hiring, promotion, and funding decisions. Concerns have been expressed that popular citation-based metrics incentivize researchers to maximize the production…
Bibliometricians have long recurred to citation counts to measure the impact of publications on the advancement of science. However, since the earliest days of the field, some scholars have questioned whether all citations should be worth…
Citation numbers are extensively used for assessing the quality of scientific research. The use of raw citation counts is generally misleading, especially when applied to cross-disciplinary comparisons, since the average number of citations…
The launching of Scopus and Google Scholar, and methodological developments in Social Network Analysis have made many more indicators for evaluating journals available than the traditional Impact Factor, Cited Half-life, and Immediacy Index…