Comparison of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judgment for 147 chemistry research groups
- Anthony F. J. van Raan
- … show all 1 hide
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
In this paper we present characteristics of the statistical correlation between the Hirsch (h-) index and several standard bibliometric indicators, as well as with the results of peer review judgment. We use the results of a large evaluation study of 147 university chemistry research groups in the Netherlands covering the work of about 700 senior researchers during the period 1991–2000. Thus, we deal with research groups rather than individual scientists, as we consider the research group as the most important work floor unit in research, particularly in the natural sciences. Furthermore, we restrict the citation period to a three-year window instead of ‘life time counts’ in order to focus on the impact of recent work and thus on current research performance. Results show that the h-index and our bibliometric ‘crown indicator’ both relate in a quite comparable way with peer judgments. But for smaller groups in fields with ‘less heavy citation traffic’ the crown indicator appears to be a more appropriate measure of research performance.
- Ball, P (2005) Index aims for fair ranking of scientists. Nature 436: pp. 900 CrossRef
- Batista, P. D., M. G. Campiteli, O. Kinouchi, A. S. Martinez (2005), Is it possible to compare researchers with different scientific interests? ArXiv.physics/0509048, accessible via http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0509048
- Bornmann, L, Daniel, H-D (2005) Does the h-index for ranking of scientists really work?. Scientometrics 65: pp. 391-392 CrossRef
- Braun, T., W. Glänzel, A. Schubert (2005), A Hirsch-type index for journals. The Scientist, 19 (22): 8.
- Hirsch, J E (2005) An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 102: pp. 16569-16572 CrossRef
- Moed, H F (2005) Citation Aanalysis in Research Evaluation. Springer, Dordrecht
- Popov, S. B. (2005), A parameter to quantify dynamics of a researcher’s scientific activity. ArXiv:physics/0508113, accessible via http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0508113
- Van Leeuwen, T. N., M. S. Visser, H. F. Moed, A. J. Nederhof (2002), The third bibliometric study on chemistry research associated with the council for chemical sciences of the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO-CW) 1991–2000. Report CWTS 2002-01. Leiden: CWTS.
- Raan, A F J (1996) Advanced bibliometric methods as quantitative core of peer review based evaluation and foresight exercises. Scientometrics 36: pp. 397-420 CrossRef
- Raan, A F J Measuring science. Capita selecta of current main issues. In: Moed, H F, Glänzel, W, Schmoch, U eds. (2004) Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 19-50
- Raan, A F J (2005) Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods. Scientometrics 62: pp. 133-143 CrossRef
- Raan, A F J (2006) Statistical properties of bibliometric indicators: Research group indicator distributions and correlations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (JASIST) 57: pp. 408-430 CrossRef
- VSNU (2002). Chemistry and Chemical Engineering. VSNU Series ‘Assessment of Research Quality’. Utrecht: VSNU (ISBN 90 5588 4979).
- Comparison of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judgment for 147 chemistry research groups
Volume 67, Issue 3 , pp 491-502
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- Industry Sectors
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Center for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University, Wassenaarseweg 52, P. O. Box 9555, 2300, RB Leiden, The Netherlands