There are several citation databases (e.g. Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar) for getting h-index of a given author. In your opinion, which of them bring more prestige?
Ali - it is a difficult question to answer. It depends who is observing your professional portfolio as to what counts as 'prestige'. For instance, if you are applying for a new position at another university - what do you think their criteria might be i.e. your highest h-index - or the most traditional and conservative h-index (which is most likely to be the ISI Thomson Reuters calculation - as Marius correctly identifies). ISI only include the sources contained in their journal database according to their metric. Google Scholar, as Marius also indicates, also covers thesis, dissertation, report, books, book chapters etc. That may account for up to around three times, or more, what ISI might report. Mohamed likes Scopus - which is usually somewhere in between the two.
Dear Ali this link may also be useful,
Which one is more important: Total citation, H-index and i10- index in academics and how they are interpreted ?
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Which_one_is_more_important_Total_citation_H-index_and_i10-index_in_academics_and_how_they_are_interpreted?_tpcectx=profile_questions
Hom - the i10 index is useful - especially if you have multiple publications and/or oner is relatively new to publication. Whereas it may take a few years for a 'standard' article to achieve 20 plus citations (for its H-index) - it will take far less time to reach 10 citations. That said, I've only seen my i10 score in Google Scholar.
Dear Prof Dean,
One my recent article which has only 8 citation it is not H-index article for my profile (Google Scholar) but it is H-index article for the Journal which published this article. It shows H-index of the same article also varies. Some times I get confused how H-index is calculated by Google Scholar.
Dear Marius,
Thank you for the relevant paper and good explanations.
Dear Dean,
Thanks. It seems that h-indices offered by Web of Science and Scopus are more reliable than GS due to their clarity. Also, it should be considered that most of bibliometrics studies use data of Web of Science for this index.
Dear Hom,
Thank you for participation. We can calculate h-index for authors, journals, academic institutions, etc; but, the original idea of h-index is for authors.
Hi
very interesting topic.
Within the scientific commission of my Institute -IRD in France- I have convinced my colleagues to accept both ISI and SCOPUS as standard metrics to assess people's work.
GS is much difficult to compare without cleaning the results, which not all people are ready to do.
RG seems well represenbtative of the researcher's production, and includes all kinds of productions as GS, but without the mispelling of names nor the cleaning to do. But not all colleagues have an account on RG, which biases the results, even if the visbility of everyones work increases with time, even for those who have note registered.
I have written a short comaprative study about this.
Share it if you find it useful.
And thanks to colleagues for the links to other very interesting studies on the question.
Best
Gil
Working Paper The indexation of scientific journals and the bibliometry: e...
Dear Gil,
Thanks for your explanations and interesting file.
Regards
The definition of the h-index is standard across a variety of journal and individual academic rankings websites.
The original h-index was established for WoS/Publons/Clarivate Analytics, but Scopus is quickly becoming very well known.
Google Scholar includes a wider range of "articles" in their database, as does RG, so their respective h-indexes are typically higher than their counterparts in WoS and Scopus.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Citations