Comparison of the h-index for different fields of research using bootstrap methodology

An important disadvantage of the h-index is that typically it cannot take into account the specific field of research of a researcher. Usually sample point estimates of the average and median h-index values for the various fields are reported that are highly variable and dependent of the specific samples and it would be useful to provide confidence intervals of prediction accuracy. In this paper we apply the non-parametric bootstrap technique for constructing confidence intervals for the h-index for different fields of research. In this way no specific assumptions about the distribution of the empirical h-index are required as well as no large samples since that the methodology is based on resampling from the initial sample. The results of the analysis showed important differences between the various fields. The performance of the bootstrap intervals for the mean and median h-index for most fields seems to be rather satisfactory as revealed by the performed simulation.

[1]  B. Efron,et al.  Bootstrap confidence intervals , 1996 .

[2]  B. Efron.  The jackknife, the bootstrap, and other resampling plans , 1987 .

[3]  Anthony F. J. van Raan,et al.  Measurement of Central Aspects of Scientific Research: Performance, Interdisciplinarity, Structure , 2005 .

[4]  Anthony F. J. van Raan,et al.  Universality of citation distributions revisited , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

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

[6]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  A systematic analysis of Hirsch-type indices for journals , 2007, J. Informetrics.

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

[8]  Igor Podlubny,et al.  Comparison of scientific impact expressed by the number of citations in different fields of science , 2004, Scientometrics.

[9]  Debashis Kushary,et al.  Bootstrap Methods and Their Application , 2000, Technometrics.

[10]  Quentin L. Burrell,et al.  Hirsch's h-index: A stochastic model , 2007, J. Informetrics.

[11]  Jan Beirlant,et al.  Asymptotics for the Hirsch Index , 2007 .

[12]  Aggelos Bletsas,et al.  Hirsch index rankings require scaling and higher moment , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[13]  B. Efron.  Better Bootstrap Confidence Intervals , 1987 .

[14]  Igor Podlubny,et al.  Towards a better list of citation superstars: compiling a multidisciplinary list of highly cited researchers , 2006, ArXiv.

[15]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  On the Opportunities and Limitations of the H-index , 2006 .

[16]  Jan Beirlant,et al.  Asymptotics for the Hirsch Index , 2007 .

[17]  Mohammad Kazem Fallahzadeh,et al.  n-index: a novel and easily-calculable parameter for comparison of researchers working in different scientific fields. , 2010, Indian journal of dermatology, venereology and leprology.

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

[19]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  Universality of citation distributions–A validation of Radicchi et al.'s relative indicator c f = c-c 0 at the micro level using data from chemistry , 2009 .

[20]  Peter Taylor,et al.  Citation Statistics , 2009, ArXiv.

[21]  Osame Kinouchi,et al.  Universal Behavior of a Research Productivity Index , 2005 .

[22]  B. Efron,et al.  The Jackknife: The Bootstrap and Other Resampling Plans. , 1983 .

[23]  M. Kenward,et al.  An Introduction to the Bootstrap , 2007 .