Measuring Scholarly Impact Using Modern Citation-Based Indices

Measurement

Volumn 10, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 123-146

  Ruscio, John ^a   Seaman, Florence ^b   D'Oriano, Carianne ^a   Stremlo, Elena ^a   Mahalchik, Krista ^a  

^a The College of New Jersey   (United States)

^b Och Spine at New York Presbyterian Hospitals   (United States)

Author keywords

citations; h index; scholarly impact; self citation; shared authorship

Indexed keywords

EID: 84866860539     PISSN: 15366367     EISSN: 15366359     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15366367.2012.711147     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Abbott, A., Cyranoski, D., Jones, N., Maher, B., Schiermeier, Q. and Van Noorden, R. 2010. Do metrics matter?. Nature, 465 June 17: 860-862. doi:10.1038/465860a
2. Alonso, S., Cabrerizo, F. J., Herrera-Viedma, E. and Herrera, F. 2009. h-index: A review focused in its variants, computation and standardization for different scientific fields. Journal of Informetrics, 3: 273-289. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2009.04.001
3. Alonso, S., Cabrerizo, F. J., Herrera-Viedma, E. and Herrera, F. 2010. hg-index: A new index to characterize the scientific output of researchers based on the h- and g- indices. Scientometrics, 82: 391-400. doi:10.1007/s11192-009-0047-5
4. American Psychological Association. (2002). American Psychological Association ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. http://www.apa.org/ethics/code2002.html (http://www.apa.org/ethics/code2002.html)
5. Anderson, T., Hankin, K. and Killworth, P. 2008. Beyond the Durfee square: Enhancing the h-index to score total publication output. Scientometrics, 76: 577-588. doi:10.1007/s11192-007-2071-2
6. Andrews, G. E. 1984. The theory of partitions, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
7. Bartolucci, F. in press. On a possible decomposition of the h-index. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology.,
8. Bornmann, L., Mutz, R. and Daniel, H.-D. 2008. Are there better indices for evaluation purposes than the h index? A comparison of nine different variants on the h index using data from biomedicine. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59: 830-837. doi:10.1002/asi.20806
9. Bornmann, L., Wallon, G. and Ledin, A. 2008. Is the h-index related to (standard) measures and to the assessments by peers? An investigation of the h-index by using molecular life sciences data. Research Evaluation, 17: 149-156. doi:10.3152/095820208X319166
10. 2-index: Quantitative and qualitative evaluation based on the number and impact of authors in the Hirsch core. Journal of Informetrics, 4: 23-28. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2009.06.005
11. Clauset, A., Shalizi, C. S. and Newman, M. E. J. 2009. Power-law distributions in empirical data. SIAM Review, 51: 661-703. doi:10.1137/070710111
12. Costas, R., van Leeuwen, T. N. and Bordons, M. 2010. Self-citations at the meso and individual levels: Effects of different calculation methods. Scientometrics, 82: 517-537. doi:10.1007/s11192-010-0187-7
13. Duffy, R. D., Jadidian, A., Webster, G. D. and Sandell, K. J. 2011. The research productivity of academic psychologists: Assessment, trends, and best practice recommendations. Scientometrics, 89: 207-227. doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0452-4
14. Duffy, R. D., Martin, H. M., Bryan, N. A. and Raque-Bogdan, T. L. 2008. Measuring individual research productivity: A review and development of the Integrated Research Productivity Index. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 55: 518-527. doi:10.1037/a0013618
15. Efron, B. and Tibshirani, R. J. 1993. An introduction to the bootstrap, San Francisco, CA: Chapman & Hall.
16. Egghe, L. 2006. Theory and practise of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69: 131-152. doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0144-7
17. Egghe, L. 2008. Mathematical theory of the h- and g-index in case of fractional counting of authorship. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59: 1608-1616. doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0144-7
18. Egghe, L. and Rousseau, R. 2008. An h-index weighted by citation impact. Information Processing and Management, 44: 770-780. doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2007.05.003
19. Endler, N. S., Rushton, J. P. and Roediger, H. L. III. 1978. Productivity and scholarly impact (citations) of British, Canadian, and U. S. departments of psychology (1975). American Psychologist, 33: 1064-1082. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.33.12.1064
20. Franceschet, M. 2009. A cluster analysis of scholar and journal bibliometric indicators. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60: 1950-1964. doi:10.1002/asi.21152
21. Garfield, E. 2006. The history and meaning of the Journal Impact Factor. Journal of the American Medical Association, 295: 90-93. doi:10.1001/jama.295.1.90
22. Goldberger, M. L., Maher, B. A. and Flattau, P. E. 1995. Research doctorate programs in the United States: Continuity and change, Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
23. Guerin, M. T. 2010. Ranking the scholarly impact of New Jersey colleges and universities in the field of psychology. TCNJ Journal of Student Scholarship, 12: 1-11.
24. Hagen, N. T. 2008. Harmonic allocation of authorship credit: Source-level correction of bibliometric bias assures accurate publication and citation analysis. PLoS One, 3(12): e4021 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0004021
25. Haslam, N. and Koval, P. 2010. Predicting long-term citation impact of articles in personality and social psychology. Psychological Reports, 106: 891-900. doi:10.2466/pr0.106.3.891.900
26. Haslam, N. and Laham, S. M. 2010. Quality, quantity, and impact in academic publication. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40: 216-220. doi:10.1002/ejsp.727
27. Hicks, D. 2006. The dangers of partial bibliometric evaluation in the Social Sciences. Economia Politica, 23: 145-162. doi:10.1428/22461
28. Hirsch, J. E. 2005. An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102: 16569-16572. doi:10.1073/pnas.0507655102
29. Hirsch, J. E. 2007. Does the h-index have predictive power?. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104: 19193-19198. doi:10.1073/pnas.0707962104
30. Jensen, P., Rouquier, J.-B. and Croissant, Y. 2009. Testing bibliometric indicators by their predictions of scientists' promotions. Scientometrics, 78: 467-479. doi:10.1007/s11192-007-2014-3
31. Jin, B. 2006. H index: An evaluation indicator proposed by Scientist. Science Focus, 1: 8-9.
32. Jin, B., Liang, L., Rousseau, R. and Egghe, L. 2007. The R- and AR- indices: Complementing the h-index. Chinese Science Bulletin, 52: 855-863.
33. Kosmulski, M. 2006. A new Hirsch-type index saves time and works equally well as the original h-index. ISSI Newsletter. 2: 4-6.
34. Kosmulski, M. (2007). MAXPROD: A new index for assessment of the scientific output of an individual, and a comparison with the h-index. International Journal of Scientometrics, Informetrics, and Bibliometrics, 11. http://cybermetrics.cindoc.csic.es/articles/v11i1p5.pdf (http://cybermetrics.cindoc.csic.es/articles/v11i1p5.pdf)
35. Molinari, J. F. and Molinari, A. 2008. A new methodology for ranking scientific institutions. Scientometrics, 75: 163-174. doi:10.1007/s11192-007-1853-2
36. Nosek, B. A., Graham, J., Lindner, N. M., Kesebir, S., Hawkins, C. B., Hahn, C. and Tenney, E. R. 2010. Cumulative and career-stage citation impact of social-personality psychology programs and their members. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36: 1283-1300. doi:10.1177/0146167210378111
37. Panaretos, J. and Malesios, C. 2009. Assessing scientific research performance and impact with single indices. Scientometrics, 81: 635-670. doi:10.1007/s11192-008-2174-9
38. Petersen, A. M., Wang, F. and Stanley, H. E. 2010. Methods for measuring the citations and productivity of scientists over time and discipline. Physical Review E, 81: 036114 doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.81.036114
39. Radicchi, F., Fortunato, S. and Castellano, C. 2008. Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105: 17268-17272. doi:10.1073/pnas.0806977105
40. q indices, Manuscript in preparation.
41. Schreiber, M. 2007. Self-citation corrections for the Hirsch index. Euro-Physics Letters, 78: 30002 doi:10.1209/0295-5075/78/30002
42. m-index accounts for multi-authored manuscripts. Journal of Informetrics, 2: 211-216.
43. Schreiber, M. 2010. A case study of the modified g index: Counting multi-author publications fractionally. Journal of Informetrics, 4: 636-643. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2009.06.003
44. Smith, N. G. 2010. Productivity in lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender scholarship in counseling psychology: Institutional and individual ratings for 1990 through 2008. Counseling Psychologist, 38: 50-68. doi:10.1177/0011000009345533
45. Sternberg, R. J. 2003. The anatomy of impact: What makes the great works of psychology great, Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
46. Tol, R. S. J. 2009. The h-index and its alternatives: An application to the 100 most prolific economists. Scientometrics, 80: 317-324. doi:10.1007/s11192-008-2079-7
47. Van Noorden, R. 2010. A profusion of measures. Nature, 465 June 17: 864-866. doi:10.1038/465864a
48. Zhang, C.-T. 2009. The e-index, complementing the h-index for excess citations. PLoS One, 4(5): e5429 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0005429
49. Zhivotovsky, L. A. and Krutovsky, K. V. 2008. Self-citation can inflate h-index. Scientometrics, 77: 373-375. doi:10.1007/s11192-006-1716-2