Abstract
The current study applies the hIa metric of Harzing et al. (Scientometrics 99(3):811–821 2014) to examine average faculty research performance across 5 Colleges in a single university. Average faculty performance for a range of common metrics of research publication such as papers, citations and h-index are presented to allow for a comparison of the degree to which the hIa can account for differences in publication patterns and career lengths in the current sample of faculty (N = 474). Scopus publication data for all faculty members across 5 Colleges was collected and analyzed to evaluate the assertion that the hIa provides a more reliable metric for comparison between academics of different career lengths, and academics researching in different disciplines. Comparison of current results with the results from the original work of Harzing et al. (Scientometrics 99(3):811–821 2014) offer strong support for the usefulness of the hIa in qualitatively and quantitatively different academic environments. Results are discussed in relation to the potential value and appropriate use of the hIa metric.
References
Alonso, S., Cabrerizo, F. J., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2009). h-Index: A review focused in its variants, computation and standardization for different scientific fields. Journal of Informetrics, 3(4), 273–289.
Antonakis, J., & Lalive, R. (2008). Quantifying scholarly impact: IQp versus the Hirsch h. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(6), 956–969.
Baldwin-Edwards, M. (2011). Labour immigration and labour markets in the GCC countries: national patterns and trends. (Vol. 15): Kuwait Programme on Development, Governance and Globalisation in the Gulf States.
Batista, P. D., Campiteli, M. G., & Kinouchi, O. (2006). Is it possible to compare researchers with different scientific interests? Scientometrics, 68(1), 179–189.
Bornmann, L., & Marx, W. (2011). The h index as a research performance indicator. European Science Editing, 37(3), 77–80.
Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., Hug, S. E., & Daniel, H.-D. (2011). A multilevel meta-analysis of studies reporting correlations between the h index and 37 different h index variants. Journal of Informetrics, 5(3), 346–359.
Elsevier, BV. (2014). Subject area categories. 2015, http://help.scopus.com/Content/h_subject_categories.htm.
Elsevier, BV. (2015). SCOPUS Content. http://www.elsevier.com/solutions/scopus/content.
Gagolewski, M., & Mesiar, R. (2012). Aggregating different paper quality measures with a generalized h-index. Journal of Informetrics, 6(4), 566–579.
Gaster, N., & Gaster, M. (2012). A critical assessment of the h-index. BioEssays, 34(10), 830–832.
Harzing, A.W. (2007). Publish or Perish: http://www.harzing.com/pop.htm.
Harzing, A.-W., & Alakangas, S. (2016). Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: a longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics, 106(2), 787–804. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1798-9.
Harzing, A.-W., Alakangas, S., & Adams, D. (2014). hIa: an individual annual h-index to accommodate disciplinary and career length differences. Scientometrics, 99(3), 811–821.
Harzing, A.-W., & Mijnhardt, W. (2015). Proof over promise: towards a more inclusive ranking of Dutch academics in Economics and Business. Scientometrics, 102(1), 727–749.
Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46), 16569–16572.
Hirsch, J. E. (2010). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output that takes into account the effect of multiple coauthorship. Scientometrics, 85(3), 741–754.
Hunt, G. E., Cleary, M., & Walter, G. (2010). Psychiatry and the Hirsch h-index: The relationship between journal impact factors and accrued citations. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 18(4), 207–219.
Kaur, J., Radicchi, F., & Menczer, F. (2013). Universality of scholarly impact metrics. Journal of Informetrics, 7(4), 924–932.
McCarty, C., Jawitz, J. W., Hopkins, A., & Goldman, A. (2013). Predicting author h-index using characteristics of the co-author network. Scientometrics, 96(2), 467–483.
Mingers, J., Macri, F., & Petrovici, D. (2012). Using the h-index to measure the quality of journals in the field of business and management. Information Processing and Management, 48(2), 234–241.
Mosey, S., Wright, M., & Clarysse, B. (2012). Transforming traditional university structures for the knowledge economy through multidisciplinary institutes. Cambridge Journal of Economics,. doi:10.1093/cje/bes008.
Quacquarelli Symonds Limited. (2015a). Faculty area normalization – Technical explanation. http://content.qs.com/qsiu/Faculty_Area_Normalization_-_Technical_Explanation.pdf.
Quacquarelli Symonds Limited. (2015b). QS Top Universities: Worldwide university rankings, guides and events. Retrieved 23/02/2016, 2016, http://www.topuniversities.com/.
Quigley, M. R., Holliday, E. B., Fuller, C. D., Choi, M., & Thomas, C. R, Jr. (2012). Distribution of the h-index in radiation oncology conforms to a variation of power law: implications for assessing academic productivity. Journal of Cancer Education, 27(3), 463–466.
Ryan, J. C. (2014). The work motivation of research scientists and its effect on research performance. R&D Management, 44(4), 355–369.
Ryan, J. C., & Hurley, J. (2007). An empirical examination of the relationship between scientists’ work environment and research performance. R&D Management, 37(4), 345–354.
Ryan, J. C., & Tipu, S. (2009). An instrument for the self-appraisal of scientific research performance. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 58(7), 632–644.
Schreiber, M. (2008). A modification of the h-index: The h m-index accounts for multi-authored manuscripts. Journal of Informetrics, 2(3), 211–216.
Schreiber, M. (2013). How relevant is the predictive power of the h-index? A case study of the time-dependent Hirsch index. Journal of Informetrics, 7(2), 325–329.
Schreiber, M., Malesios, C. C., & Psarakis, S. (2012). Exploratory factor analysis for the Hirsch index, 17 h-type variants, and some traditional bibliometric indicators. Journal of Informetrics, 6(3), 347–358.
Schubert, A. (2011). A Hirsch-type index of co-author partnership ability. Scientometrics, 91(1), 303–308.
Sidiropoulos, A., Katsaros, D., & Manolopoulos, Y. (2007). Generalized Hirsch h-index for disclosing latent facts in citation networks. Scientometrics, 72(2), 253–280.
Svider, P. F., Choudhry, Z. A., Choudhry, O. J., Baredes, S., Liu, J. K., & Eloy, J. A. (2013). The use of the h-index in academic otolaryngology. The Laryngoscope, 123(1), 103–106.
Tol, R. S. (2011). Credit where credit’s due: accounting for co-authorship in citation counts. Scientometrics, 89(1), 291–299.
van Arensbergen, P., van der Weijden, I., & Van den Besselaar, P. (2012). Gender differences in scientific productivity: a persisting phenomenon? Scientometrics, 93(3), 857–868.
Waltman, L., & Van Eck, N. J. (2012). The inconsistency of the h-index. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(2), 406–415.
Yuret, T. (2015). Interfield comparison of academic output by using department level data. Scientometrics, 105(3), 1653–1664.
Zuckerman, H., & Merton, R. K. (1971). Patterns of evaluation in science: Institutionalisation, structure and functions of the referee system. Minerva, 9(1), 66–100.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ryan, J.C. A validation of the individual annual h-index (hIa): application of the hIa to a qualitatively and quantitatively different sample. Scientometrics 109, 577–590 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1972-8
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1972-8