An index has been proposed by Fiorillo (document attached at https://imechanica.org/node/27334).
The meaning of Fiorillo's index is simple. If h-index indicates the number of articles that are cited each at least h times, it is clear that maximum efficiency is achieved with h-index^2 citations. Fiorillo index is h_index^2/tot citation *100. So if someone has Fiorillo index =100, it means that he has maximum efficiency, an absurd limit to reach without a prior agreement between all scientists! Fiorillo found that out of 200 thousand researchers of reasonable validity taken from the Ioannidis database in Scopus of the top 2% researchers in the world, the average is around 25, and therefore he considered it suspicious (he says "BAD") that someone has an efficiency greater than 32, close to the optimal absurd one. That's all. Maybe it's his BAD index, namely we could postpone the threshold to 40 or 50, but certainly the closer to 100, the more worrying the situation is that there is citation gaming, and abuse of self-citations. Fiorillo also makes a borderline case, having 1 article cited once also has this Fiorillo index equal to 100, but you will agree with him that it is a ridiculous case for the top 200 thousand researchers we are talking about. You can easily measure Fiorillo index in your university using the Stanford database, which you can find at Article A standardized citation metrics author database annotated fo...
Regards
Mike
Dariusz Prokopowicz: A New Index to Spot Citation Gaming - The Fiorello Index
In the contemporary landscape of academic publishing, the integrity of scholarly communication is threatened by the phenomenon known as citation gaming. This unethical practice, where researchers artificially inflate their citation metrics to enhance their perceived impact, undermines the credibility of academic discourse and poses challenges for institutions and funding bodies alike. In response to this growing concern, Dariusz Prokopowicz has proposed a novel analytical tool — the Fiorello Index — designed to detect and mitigate the effects of citation manipulation.
The Fiorello Index seeks to provide researchers, journal editors, and policymakers with a robust framework for identifying suspicious citation patterns that deviate from genuine academic engagement. Unlike traditional metrics that merely account for the volume of citations, the Fiorello Index incorporates qualitative assessments of citation contexts and relationships. By analyzing the interconnectivity of cited works and the appropriateness of citations within scholarly discussions, this index aims to distinguish between legitimate academic discourse and strategies aimed at achieving artificially inflated citation counts.
Prokopowicz’s contribution addresses a critical gap in the existing metrics landscape, where reliance on quantifiable indicators alone can inadvertently encourage malpractices. By fostering a more nuanced understanding of citation dynamics, the Fiorello Index encourages scholars to engage in ethical citation practices and cultivates a more trustworthy academic environment. Ultimately, the implementation of the Fiorello Index represents a significant step forward in safeguarding the integrity of scholarly research, ensuring that citation practices reflect the true merit of academic contributions rather than mere tactical maneuvering.
In conclusion, Dariusz Prokopowicz’s Fiorello Index is a timely and necessary innovation in the fight against citation gaming. By prioritizing the substance of academic discourse over superficial metrics, the index aims to restore trust in scholarly communication and promote a culture of integrity within the research community. As academic publishing continues to evolve, tools like the Fiorello Index will be essential in curbing the misuse of citation practices and fostering a more authentic engagement with knowledge dissemination.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Filing