Comparison of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judgment for 147 chemistry research groups
Top Cited Papers
- 1 June 2006
- journal article
- Published by Springer Nature in Scientometrics
- Vol. 67 (3) , 491-502
- https://doi.org/10.1556/scient.67.2006.3.10
Abstract
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.Keywords
All Related Versions
This publication has 7 references indexed in Scilit:
- Statistical properties of bibliometric indicators: Research group indicator distributions and correlationsJournal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2005
- Does the h-index for ranking of scientists really work?Scientometrics, 2005
- An index to quantify an individual's scientific research outputProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2005
- Index aims for fair ranking of scientistsNature, 2005
- Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methodsScientometrics, 2005
- Measuring SciencePublished by Springer Nature ,2004
- Advanced bibliometric methods as quantitative core of peer review based evaluation and foresight exercisesScientometrics, 1996