IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v20y2011i4p341-346.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A disadvantage of h-type indices for comparing the citation impact of two researchers

Author

Listed:
  • L Egghe

Abstract

We show that the rank-frequency functions of two researchers usually intersect. As a consequence of this, different h-type indices can conclude on different impact judgements of the two researchers. Also in this paper a new indicator is proposed: the average number of citations per paper in the papers whose ranks are smaller than or equal to the intersection point of their two rank-frequency functions. The theoretical derivations are illustrated using an empirical example. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • L Egghe, 2011. "A disadvantage of h-type indices for comparing the citation impact of two researchers," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(4), pages 341-346, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:20:y:2011:i:4:p:341-346
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/095820211X13164389670356
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. L. Egghe, 2013. "Theoretical justification of the central area indices and the central interval indices," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(1), pages 25-34, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:20:y:2011:i:4:p:341-346. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.