Does the h index for assessing single publications really work? A case study on papers published in chemistry

Scientometrics

Volumn 89, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 835-843

  Bornmann, Lutz ^a   Schier, Hermann ^b   Marx, Werner ^b   Daniel, Hans Dieter ^c,d  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE   (Germany)

^b MAX PLANCK INSTITUT FÜR FESTKÖRPERFORSCHUNG   (Germany)

^c ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^d UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Chemistry; h index; Journal peer review; Single publication h index

Indexed keywords

EID: 80255141816     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-011-0472-0     Document Type: Review

References (20)

1. Bornmann, L. (2011). Scientific peer review. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 45, 199-245.
2. Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H.-D. (2007). What do we know about the h index? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(9), 1381-1385. doi: 10. 1002/asi. 20609.
3. Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H.-D. (2008a). The effectiveness of the peer review process: Inter-referee agreement and predictive validity of manuscript refereeing at Angewandte Chemie. Angewandte Chemie International Edition, 47(38), 7173-7178. doi: 10. 1002/anie. 200800513.
4. Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H.-D. (2008b). Selecting manuscripts for a high impact journal through peer review: A citation analysis of Communications that were accepted by Angewandte Chemie International Edition, or rejected but published elsewhere. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(11), 1841-1852. doi: 10. 1002/asi. 20901.
5. Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H.-D. (2009a). Extent of type I and type II errors in editorial decisions: A case study on Angewandte Chemie International Edition. Journal of Informetrics, 3(4), 348-352.
6. Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H.-D. (2009b). The luck of the referee draw: The effect of exchanging reviews. Learned Publishing, 22(2), 117-125. doi: 10. 1087/2009207.
7. Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H.-D. (2009c). The state of h index research. Is the h index the ideal way to measure research performance? EMBO Reports, 10(1), 2-6. doi: 10. 1038/embor. 2008. 233.
8. Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H.-D. (2010). The manuscript reviewing process: Empirical research on review requests, review sequences and decision rules in peer review. Library and Information Science Research, 32(1), 5-12. doi: 10. 1016/j. lisr. 2009. 07. 010.
9. Bornmann, L., Marx, W., Schier, H., Rahm, E., Thor, A., & Daniel, H. D. (2009). Convergent validity of bibliometric Google Scholar data in the field of chemistry. Citation counts for papers that were accepted by Angewandte Chemie International Edition or rejected but published elsewhere, using Google Scholar, Science Citation Index, Scopus, and Chemical Abstracts. Journal of Informetrics, 3(1), 27-35. doi: 10. 1016/j. joi. 2008. 11. 001.
10. Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., & Daniel, H.-D. (2007). The b index as a measure of scientific excellence. A promising supplement to the h index. Cybermetrics, 11(1), paper 6.
11. Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., Marx, W., Schier, H., & Daniel, H.-D. (2011). A multilevel modelling approach to investigating the predictive validity of editorial decisions: Do the editors of a high-profile journal select manuscripts that are highly cited after publication? Journal of the Royal Statistical Society-Series A (Statistics in Society), 174(4). doi: 10. 1111/j. 1467-985X. 2011. 00689. x.
12. Bornmann, L., Weymuth, C., & Daniel, H.-D. (2010). A content analysis of referees' comments: How do comments on manuscripts rejected by a high-impact journal and later published in either a low- or high-impact journal differ? Scientometrics, 83(2), 493-506.
13. Cole, S. (1989). Citations and the evaluation of individual scientists. Trends in Biochemical Sciences, 14(1), 9-13.
14. Franceschini, F., & Maisano, D. A. (2010). Analysis of the Hirsch index's operational properties. European Journal of Operational Research, 203(2), 494-504. doi: 10. 1016/j. ejor. 2009. 08. 001.
15. 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. doi: 10. 1073/pnas. 0507655102.
16. Schubert, A. (2009). Using the h-index for assessing single publications. Scientometrics, 78(3), 559-565.
17. Sheskin, D. (2007). Handbook of parametric and nonparametric statistical procedures (4th ed.). Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
18. StataCorp. (2009). Stata Statistical Software: Release 11. College Station: Stata Corporation.
19. Thorngate, W., Dawes, R. M., & Foddy, M. (2009). Judging merit. New York: Psychology Press.
20. van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2008). Generalizing the h- and g-indices. Journal of Informetrics, 2(4), 263-271.