A parametric “parent metric” approach for comparing maximum‐normalized journal ranking metrics

This article proposes a parametric approach for facilitating inter‐metric and inter‐field comparisons of citation‐based journal ranking metrics. The mechanism is simple to apply and adjusts for metric magnitude differentials and distributional asymmetries in the rank‐score curves. The method is demonstrated using h‐index, AWCR‐index, g‐index, and e‐index data from journals in Accounting, Economics, and Finance.

[1]  L. Egghe,et al.  Theory and practise of the g-index , 2006, Scientometrics.

[2]  Leo Egghe,et al.  An informetric model for the Hirsch-index , 2006, Scientometrics.

[3]  M. Haley.  Rank variability of the Publish or Perish metrics for economics and finance journals , 2013 .

[4]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  How can journal impact factors be normalized across fields of science? An assessment in terms of percentile ranks and fractional counts , 2012, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[5]  M. Ryan Haley,et al.  Ranking top economics and finance journals using Microsoft academic search versus Google scholar: How does the new publish or perish option compare? , 2014, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[6]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  A multilevel meta-analysis of studies reporting correlations between the h index and 37 different h index variants , 2011, J. Informetrics.

[7]  Claudio Castellano,et al.  Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[8]  Keshra Sangwal,et al.  Citation and impact factor distributions of scientific journals published in individual countries , 2013, J. Informetrics.

[9]  M. Haley.  On the inauspicious incentives of the scholar-level h-index: an economist’s take on collusive and coercive citation , 2017 .

[10]  M. Haley.  A ranking of journals for the aspiring health economist , 2016 .

[11]  Lorna Elizabeth Wildgaard,et al.  A comparison of 17 author-level bibliometric indicators for researchers in Astronomy, Environmental Science, Philosophy and Public Health in Web of Science and Google Scholar , 2015, Scientometrics.

[12]  Juan E. Iglesias,et al.  Scaling the h-index for different scientific ISI fields , 2006, Scientometrics.

[13]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  The normalization of citation counts based on classification systems , 2013, Publ..

[14]  Germinal Cocho,et al.  On the behavior of journal impact factor rank-order distribution , 2006, J. Informetrics.

[15]  James G. Corrigan,et al.  Programmatic evaluation and comparison based on standardized citation scores , 1983, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

[16]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  h-Index: A review focused in its variants, computation and standardization for different scientific fields , 2009, J. Informetrics.

[17]  Alexander I. Pudovkin,et al.  Rank-normalized impact factor: A way to compare journal performance across subject categories , 2005, ASIST.

[18]  Ben R. Martin,et al.  Whither research integrity? Plagiarism, self-plagiarism and coercive citation in an age of research assessment , 2013 .

[19]  J. E. Hirsch,et al.  An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output , 2005, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA.

[20]  E. Fong,et al.  Coercive Citation in Academic Publishing , 2012, Science.

[21]  M. Ryan Haley,et al.  On the normalization and distributional adjustment of journal ranking metrics: A simple parametric approach , 2017, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[22]  Lokman I. Meho,et al.  Using the h-index to rank influential information scientists , 2006, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[23]  Chun-Ting Zhang,et al.  The e-Index, Complementing the h-Index for Excess Citations , 2009, PloS one.