Scientometrics

, Volume 77, Issue 2, pp 267–288

Is g-index better than h-index? An exploratory study at the individual level

Article

Abstract

The ability of g-index and h-index to discriminate between different types of scientists (low producers, big producers, selective scientists and top scientists) is analysed in the area of Natural Resources at the Spanish CSIC (WoS, 1994–2004). Our results show that these indicators clearly differentiate low producers and top scientists, but do not discriminate between selective scientists and big producers. However, g-index is more sensitive than h-index in the assessment of selective scientists, since this type of scientist shows in average a higher g-index/h-index ratio and a better position in g-index rankings than in the h-index ones. Current research suggests that these indexes do not substitute each other but that they are complementary.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ball, P. (2005), Index aims for fair ranking of scientists. Nature, 436 (7053): 900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Batista, P. D., Campiteli, M. G., Kinouchi, O., Martinez, A. S. (2006), It is possible to compare researchers with different scientific interests? Scientometrics, 68 (1): 179–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bordons, M., Barrigon, S. (1992), Bibliometric analysis of publication of Spanish pharmacologists in the SCI (1984–1989). 2. Contribution to subfields other than pharmacology and pharmacy (ISI). Scientometrics, 25 (3): 425–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bornmann, L., Daniel, H.-D., (2005), Does the h-index for ranking of scientists really work? Scientometrics, 65 (3): 391–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Braun, T., Glänzel, W., Schubert, A. (2006), A Hirsch-type index for journals. Scienotmetrics, 69 (1): 169–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cole, J., Cole, S. (1973). Social Stratification in Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  7. Cole, S., Cole, J. R. (1967), Scientific output and recognition: a study in the operation of the reward system in science. American Sociological Review, 32 (3): 377–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Costas, R., Bordons, M. (2005), Bibliometric indicators at the micro-level: some results in the area of natural resources at the Spanish CSIC. Research Evaluation, 14 (2): 110–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Costas, R., Bordons, M. (2007), The h-index: advantages, limitations and its relation with other bibliometric indicators at the micro-level. Journal of Informetrics, 1 (3): 193–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cronin, B., Meho, L. (2006), Using the h-index to rank influential information scientists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57 (9): 1275–1278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Egghe, L. (2006), Theory and practise of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69 (1): 131–152.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. Glanzel, W. (2006), On the h-index — A mathematical approach to a new measure of publication activity and citation impact. Scientometrics, 67 (2): 315–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 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 (46): 16569–16572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jin, B., Liang, L., Rousseau, R., Egghe, L. (2007), The R-and AR-indices: Complementing the h-index. Chinese Science Bulletin, 52 (6): 855–863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kelly, C. D., Jennions, M. D. (2006), The h-index and career assessment by numbers. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 21 (4): 167–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lewison, G., Cottrell, R., Dixon, D. (1999), Bibliometric indicators to assist the peer review process in grant decisions. Research Evaluation, 8 (1): 47–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Martin, B. R. (1996), The use of multiple indicators in the assessment of basic research. Scientometrics, 36 (3): 343–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Moed, H. F. (2000), Bibliometric indicators reflect publication and management strategies. Scientometrics, 47 (2): 323–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Moed, H. F. (2005), Hirsch-index is a creative and appealing construct but be cautious when using it to evaluate individual scholars. http://www.cwts.nl/moed/Comments_on_Hirsch_Index_2005_12_16.pdf. Accessed 23/6/2006.
  20. Oppenheim, C. (2007), Using h-index to rank influential British researchers in information science and librarianship. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58 (2): 297–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Saad, G. (2006), Exploring the h-index at the author and journal levels using bibliometric data of productive consumer scholar and business-related journals respectively. Scientometrics, 69 (1): 117–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Schubert, A., Braun, T. (1986), Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact. Scientometrics, 6 (5–6): 281–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sidiropoulos, A., Katsaros, D., Manolopoulos, Y. (2007), Generalized h-index for disclosing latent facts in citation networks. Scientometrics 72 (2): 253–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. van Leeuwen, T. N., Visser, M. S., Moed, H. F., Nederhor, T. J., van Raan, A. F. J. (2003), The Holy Grail of science policy: Exploring and combining bibliometric tools in search of scientific excellence. Scientometrics, 57 (2): 257–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. van Raan, A. F. J. (2006), Comparisons of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judment for 147 chemistry research groups. Scientometrics, 67 (3): 491–502.Google Scholar
  26. Vinkler, P. (2007), Eminence of scientists in the light of h-index and other scientometric indicators. Journal of Information Science, 33 (4): 481–491.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  27. Weingart, P. (2005), Impact of bibliometrics upon the science system: inadverted consequences? Scientometrics, 62 (1): 117–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centro de Información y Documentación Científica, CINDOC-CSICMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations