| Homepage |
| Search |
Measuring quality in science is difficult and controversial; a uniform method that can be applied across all fields is needed. The quantification is generally summed up with the impact factor of the journal in which the work is published, which shows differences between fields. Here the h-index, a way to summarise an individual’s highly-cited work, was calculated for journals over a 20-year time span and compared to the size of the journal in four fields: agriculture, condensed matter physics, genetics and heredity, and mathematical physics. The the larger the journal, the more likely it is to have a high h-index. A strike rate index, based on the log relationship of the h-index and the size of the journal, shows a similar distribution in the four fields, with similar thresholds for quality, allowing journals across diverse fields to be compared to each other. Vinkler P. Eminence of scientists in the light of the h-index and other scientometric indicators. Journal of Information Science 2007;33:481–491. (doi: 10.1177/0165551506072165) Scientometrics cannot offer a simple consistent method for measuring the scientific eminence of individuals. The h-index method introduced by Hirsch was found applicable for evaluating publications of senior scientists with similar publishing features, only. When scientometric indexes for individuals are calculated, self-citations should be excluded and the effect of the different bibliometric features of the field should be taken into account. © Copyright 2008 by European Association of Science Editors Top of Page |
|
|