New scientometric indicator for the qualitative evaluation of scientific production

Purpose – This paper aims to propose a new qualitative indicator for the evaluation of the productions of researchers in any discipline. Design/methodology/approach – Based on the study of existing quantitative indicators, the authors’ approach consisted of the hybridization of two indicators. This hybridization is based on the individual H_index (Hi_index) and H_index contemporary (Hc_index) weighted by qualitative factors. The initial sources of the data are online bibliographic databases, such as Google Scholar and Publish or Perish. Findings – A new scientometric indicator was used to compare the scientific production quality of researchers and their classification (as part of a research community) as the classification of national and international research institutions. The authors have applied a new indicator to compare and classify the members of their laboratory, RIADI, according to their quality of scientific production. Practical implications – The indicator is an improvement of the H_index. It...

[1]  Julie A. C. Virgo,et al.  A Statistical Procedure for Evaluating the Importance of Scientific Papers , 1977, The Library Quarterly.

[2]  Lokman I. Meho The Rise and Rise of Citation Analysis , 2006, ArXiv.

[3]  Alireza Noruzi Google Scholar: The New Generation of Citation Indexes , 2005 .

[4]  Adam Worrall,et al.  Author Team Diversity and the Impact of Scientific Publications , 2012 .

[5]  Thed N. van Leeuwen,et al.  On the correlation between bibliometric indicators and peer review: reply to Opthof and Leydesdorff , 2011, Scientometrics.

[6]  Henk F. Moed,et al.  The research guarantors of scientific papers and the output counting: a promising new approach , 2013, Scientometrics.

[7]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  Scientific peer review , 2011, Annu. Rev. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[8]  Stephen J. Bensman Anne-Wil Harzing: The publish or perish book: Your guide to effective and responsible citation analysis , 2011, Scientometrics.

[9]  C. Lee Giles,et al.  Digital Libraries and Autonomous Citation Indexing , 1999, Computer.

[10]  Concepción S. Wilson,et al.  The Literature of Bibliometrics, Scientometrics, and Informetrics , 2001, Scientometrics.

[11]  Jenny Walker CrossRef and SFX: Complementary Linking Services for Libraries. , 2002 .

[12]  Daren Yu,et al.  Discovery of factors influencing citation impact based on a soft fuzzy rough set model , 2012, Scientometrics.

[13]  L. Brown,et al.  Using Citation Analysis to Assess the Impact of Journals and Articles on Contemporary Accounting Research (CAR) , 1985 .

[14]  Jian Wang,et al.  How to improve the prediction based on citation impact percentiles for years shortly after the publication date? , 2013, J. Informetrics.

[15]  E. Garfield,et al.  Citation and Distinction , 1973, Nature.

[16]  Vicente P. Guerrero-Bote,et al.  A new approach to the metric of journals' scientific prestige: The SJR indicator , 2010, J. Informetrics.

[17]  Thed N. van Leeuwen,et al.  Towards a new crown indicator: Some theoretical considerations , 2010, J. Informetrics.

[18]  Michael Ley,et al.  The DBLP Computer Science Bibliography: Evolution, Research Issues, Perspectives , 2002, SPIRE.

[19]  Primoz Juznic,et al.  Scientometric indicators: peer-review, bibliometric methods and conflict of interests , 2010, Scientometrics.

[20]  Aram Tirgar,et al.  The Subject Sameness Index: a new scientometric indicator , 2013 .

[21]  Daryl E. Chubin,et al.  Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool? , 1979, Scientometrics.

[22]  Yoshiko Okubo,et al.  Bibliometric indicators and analysis of research systems , 1997 .

[23]  Thed N. van Leeuwen,et al.  Impact measures of interdisciplinary research in physics , 2002, Scientometrics.

[24]  Anthony F. J. van Raan,et al.  Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods , 2005, Scientometrics.

[25]  Tünde Gracza,et al.  [Impact factor and/or Hirsch index?]. , 2007, Orvosi hetilap.