This paper measures two main inefficiency features (many publications other than articles; many co-authors’ reciprocal citations) and two main inequity features (more co-authors in some disciplines; more citations for authors with more experience). It constructs a representative dataset based on a cross-disciplinary balanced sample (10,000 authors with at least one publication indexed in Scopus from 2006 to 2015). It estimates to what extent four additional improvements of the H-index as top-down regulations (ΔHh = Hh − Hh+1 from H1 = based on publications to H5 = net per-capita per-year based on articles) account for inefficiency and inequity across twenty-five disciplines and four subjects. Linear regressions and ANOVA results show that the single improvements of the H-index considerably and decreasingly explain the inefficiency and inequity features but make these vaguely comparable across disciplines and subjects, while the overall improvement of the H-index (H1–H5) marginally explains these features but make disciplines and subjects clearly comparable, to a greater extent across subjects than disciplines. Fitting a Gamma distribution to H5 for each discipline and subject by maximum likelihood shows that the estimated probability densities and the percentages of authors characterised by H5 ≥ 1 to H5 ≥ 3 are different across disciplines but similar across subjects.

Zagonari, F., Foschi, P. (2024). Coping with the Inequity and Inefficiency of the H-Index: A Cross-Disciplinary Empirical Analysis. PUBLICATIONS, 12(2), 1-30 [10.3390/publications12020012].

Coping with the Inequity and Inefficiency of the H-Index: A Cross-Disciplinary Empirical Analysis

Zagonari, Fabio
Primo
;
Foschi, Paolo
Secondo
2024

Abstract

This paper measures two main inefficiency features (many publications other than articles; many co-authors’ reciprocal citations) and two main inequity features (more co-authors in some disciplines; more citations for authors with more experience). It constructs a representative dataset based on a cross-disciplinary balanced sample (10,000 authors with at least one publication indexed in Scopus from 2006 to 2015). It estimates to what extent four additional improvements of the H-index as top-down regulations (ΔHh = Hh − Hh+1 from H1 = based on publications to H5 = net per-capita per-year based on articles) account for inefficiency and inequity across twenty-five disciplines and four subjects. Linear regressions and ANOVA results show that the single improvements of the H-index considerably and decreasingly explain the inefficiency and inequity features but make these vaguely comparable across disciplines and subjects, while the overall improvement of the H-index (H1–H5) marginally explains these features but make disciplines and subjects clearly comparable, to a greater extent across subjects than disciplines. Fitting a Gamma distribution to H5 for each discipline and subject by maximum likelihood shows that the estimated probability densities and the percentages of authors characterised by H5 ≥ 1 to H5 ≥ 3 are different across disciplines but similar across subjects.
2024
Zagonari, F., Foschi, P. (2024). Coping with the Inequity and Inefficiency of the H-Index: A Cross-Disciplinary Empirical Analysis. PUBLICATIONS, 12(2), 1-30 [10.3390/publications12020012].
Zagonari, Fabio; Foschi, Paolo
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
publications-12-00012-v2.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipo: Versione (PDF) editoriale
Licenza: Licenza per Accesso Aperto. Creative Commons Attribuzione (CCBY)
Dimensione 1.48 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.48 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
publications-2726490-supplementary.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipo: File Supplementare
Licenza: Licenza per Accesso Aperto. Creative Commons Attribuzione (CCBY)
Dimensione 462.25 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
462.25 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/968617
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact