, Volume 82, Issue 3, pp 461–475 | Cite as

The πv-index: a new indicator to characterize the impact of journals

  • Peter Vinkler


For determining the eminence of scientific journals, a new indicator stressing the importance of papers in the “elite set” (i.e., highly cited papers) is suggested. The number of papers in the elite set (P πv) is calculated with the equation: (10 log P) − 10, where P is the total number of papers in the set. The one-hundredth of citations (C) obtained by P πv papers is regarded as the πv-index which is field and time dependent. The πv-index is closely correlated with the citedness (C/P) of P πv papers, and it is also correlated with the Hirsch-index. Three types of Hirsch-sets are distinguished, depending on the relation of the number of citations received by the Hirsch-paper (ranked as h) and the paper next in rank (h + 1) by citation. The h-index of an Anomalous Hirsch-set (AH) may be increased by a single citation to a paper outside the Hirsch-core. (A set of papers may be regarded as AH, where the number of citations to the Hirsch-paper is higher than the h-index and the next paper in rank shows as many citations as the value of the h-index.)


π-index  Elite set Hirsch-index Eminence of journals Scientometric indicators 


  1. Aksnes, D. W. (2003). Characteristics of highly cited papers. Research Evaluation, 12, 159–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bourke, P., & Butler, L. (1996). Publication types, citation rates and evaluation. Scientometrics, 37, 473–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Braun, T., Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (1990). Publication productivity: From frequency distributions to scientometric indicators. Journal of Information Science, 16, 37–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Egghe, L. (2006). Theory and practice of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69, 131–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Egghe, L. (2007). Dynamic h-index: The Hirsch index in function of time. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58, 452–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Harter, S. P., & Hooten, P. A. (1992). Information science and scientists: JASIS 1972–1990. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43, 583–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 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, 16569–16572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. ISI Essential Science Indicators, Web of Knowledge, Thomson Reuters.Google Scholar
  9. ISI Web of Knowledge, Web of Science, Journal Citation Reports (2006).Google Scholar
  10. Jin, B. (2006). h-index: An evaluation indicator proposed by scientist. Science Focus, 1(1), 8–9.Google Scholar
  11. Koenig, M. E. D. (1983). Bibliometric indicators versus expert opinion in assessing research performance. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 34, 136–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lotka, A. J. (1926). The frequency distribution of scientific productivity. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences, 16, 317–320.Google Scholar
  13. Plomp, R. (1990). The significance of the number of highly cited papers as an indicator of scientific prolificacy. Scientometrics, 19, 185–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Seglen, P. O. (1992). The skewness of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43, 628–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Stringer, M. J., Sales-Pardo, M., & Nunes Amaral, L. A. (2008). Effectiveness of journal ranking schemes as a tool for locating information. PloS ONE, 3(2), e1683. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0001683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Vinkler, P. (1986). Evaluation of some methods for the relative assessment of scientific publications. Scientometrics, 10, 157–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Vinkler, P. (1997). Relations of relative scientometric impact indicators. The Relative Publication Strategy Index. Scientometrics, 40, 163–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Vinkler, P. (1998). General performance indices calculated for research institutes of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences based on scientometric indicators. Scientometrics, 41, 185–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Vinkler, P. (1999). Ratio of short term and long term impact factors and similarities of chemistry journals represented by references. Scientometrics, 46, 621–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Vinkler, P. (2000). Publication velocity, publication growth and impact factor: An empirical model. In B. Cronin & H. B. Atkins (Eds.), The Web of Knowledge: A Festschrift in Honor of Eugene Garfield. ASIS Monograph Series (pp. 163–176). Medford, New Jersey: Information Today, Inc.Google Scholar
  21. Vinkler, P. (2009a). Introducing the Current Contribution Index for characterizing the recent, relevant impact of journals. Scientometrics, 79, 409–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Vinkler, P. (2009b). The π-index. A new indicator for assessing scientific impact. Journal of Information Science, 35, 602–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Vinkler, P. (2010). The evaluation of research by scientometric indicators (pp. 1–313). Oxford: Chandos Publishing.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chemical Research Center of the Hungarian Academy of SciencesBudapestHungary

Personalised recommendations