Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Use of relative extra citation counts and uncited publications to enhance the discriminatory power of the h-index

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although the conventional h-index attempts to combine a researcher’s publications and citation-based impact, it requires threshold citation counts and cited papers to award a score. The consequence is that the h-index fails to consider extra citation counts as well as uncited publications, both of which reveal a researcher’s performance output. Recently, an apparent h-index was presented to extend the conventional h-index to account for the uncited publications of a researcher; unfortunately, the apparent h-index also fails to account for a researcher’s extra citation counts. In this paper, we extend the apparent h-index to account for a researcher’s extra citation counts. In particular, contrary to the conventional h-index and its variants, the proposed author-level metric uses relative extra citation counts and uncited publications to discriminate among researchers. The relative extra citation count is defined as the ratio of the absolute extra citation counts to the total number of citations. The proposed index, called a comprehensive h-index (c-index), is formulated by incorporating the relative extra citation counts and the fraction of the cited publications into the h-index. The advantages of the c-index are two-folds: first, it enhances the discriminatory power of the h-index as it considers researcher’s entire publications, whether cited or not, and all the citation counts; and second, it preserves the desirable features of the conventional h-index, namely robustness and simplicity. Case studies for researchers in Chemistry, Physics, Material Science, Engineering and Medicine have been presented. Results show that researchers could have equal h-index, but unequal c-index due to their unequal relative extra citation counts, as well as their uncited publications. Furthermore, a comparison of the c-index with the h- and g-indices have been made; results show that the c-index is more discriminatory than both the h- and g-indices. The proposed metric may contribute to the ongoing discussions on the improvement of the conventional h-index.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alonso, S., Cabrerizo, F., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2010). hg-index: A new index to characterize the scientific output of researchers based on the h- and g-indices. Scientometrics, 82, 391–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, T. R., Hankin, R. K. S., & Killworth, P. D. (2008). Beyond the durfee square: Enhancing the h-index to score total publication output. Scientometrics, 76, 577–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, C. (2017). The h-index debate: An introduction for librarians. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 43, 487–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bornmann, L., Mutza, R., & Daniel, H. (2010). The h index research output measurement: Two approaches to enhance its accuracy. Journal of Informetrics, 4, 407–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bihari, A., & Tripathi, S. (2017). EM-index: A new measure to evaluate the scientific impact of scientists. Scientometric, 112, 659–677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, O. R. (2012). The hb-index, a modified h-index designed to more fairly assess author achievement. Redox Report, 17(4), 176–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costas, R., & Bordons, M. (2008). Is the g-index better than h-index? An exploratory study at the individual level. Scientometrics, 77, 267–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorogovtsev, S. N., & Mendes, J. F. F. (2015). Ranking scientisits. Nature Physics, 11(11), 882–884.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egghe, L. (2006a). An improvement of the h-index. ISSI Newsletter, 2(1), 8–9.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Egghe, L. (2006b). Theory and Practice of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69(1), 131–152.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Egghe, L., Guns, R., & Rousseau, R. (2011). Thoughts on uncitedness: Nobel laureates and fields medalists as case studies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(8), 1637–1644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franceschini, F., & Maisano, D. (2011). Criticisms on the hg-index. Scientometrics, 82(2), 391–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadagali, G. S., Kumbar, B. D., Gourikeremath, G. N., & Hiremath, R. (2016). g-index as an improvement of the h-index: A comparative study of prominent indian scientists. International Journal of Information Dissemination and Technology, 6(51), S42-48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences, 102, 16569–16572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, Y.-S., & Hartley, J. (2016). Sleeping beauty in psychology. Scientometrics, 110, 301–305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2174-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, J., & Huang, D. (2011). A scaling between impact factor and uncitedness. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 391, 2129–2134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, Z., Lin, A., & Willett, P. (2018). Identification of research communities in cited and uncited publications using a co-authorship network. Scientometrics, 118, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2954-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jin, B., Liang, L., Rousseau, R., & Egghe, L. (2007). The R- and AR-indices: Complementing the h-index. Chinese Science Bulletin, 52, 855–863.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamat, B. (2018). Most cited versus uncited papers. What do they tell us? ACS Energy letters, 3, 2134–2135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuan, C.-H., Huang, M. H., & Chen, D. Z. (2011). Positioning research and innovation performance using shape centroids of h-core and h-tail. Journal of Informetrics., 5(4), 515–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2011.04.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammed, S., Morgan, A., & Nyantakyi, E. (2020). On the influence of uncited publications on a researcher’s h-index. Scientometrics, 122, 1791–1799.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicolaison, J., & Frandsen, T. F. (2019). Zero impact: A large-scale study of uncitedness citation. Scientometrics, 122, 1227–1254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, R. (2006). New developments related to the Hirsch index. Berlin fourth international conference on webometrics, informetrics and scientometrics and ninth COLLNET meeting (pp. 23–25). Berlin: Science Focus.

  • Rousseau, R., Leuven, K. U. (2008). Reflections on recent developments of the h-index and h-type indices . Fourth international conference on webometrics, informetrics and scientometrics & ninth COLLNET meeting (pp. 1–9). Berlin: WIS.

  • Ruane, F., & Tol, R. S. J. (2008). Rational (successive) h-indices: An application to economics in the Republic of Ireland. Scientometrics, 75(2), 395–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sidiropoulos, A., Katsaros, D., & Manolopoulos, Y. (2007). Generalized h-index for disclosing latent facts in citation networks. Scientometrics, 72, 253–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jin, B. (2006). The AR-index. Complementing the h-index. ISSI Newsletter, 6, 3(1).

  • Todeschini, R. (2011). The j-index: A new bibliometric index and multivariate comparisons between other common indices. Scientometrics, 87(3), 621–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Visscher, A. D. (2011). What does the g-index really measure? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(11), 2290–2011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, C. T. (2009). The e-index, complementing the h-index for excess citations. PLoS ONE, 4, 1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, C. T. (2013). The h’-index, effectively improving the h-index based on the citation distribution. PLoS ONE, 8, 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

We acknowledge the support, in terms of computing facility, of University of Energy and Natural Resources, Sunyani, Ghana. The inputs of the anonymous reviewers are appreciated.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Energy and Petroleum Engineering, University of Energy and Natural Resources, Sunyani, Ghana

    Shaibu Mohammed, Anthony Morgan, Prosper Anumah & Justice Sarkodie-kyeremeh

  2. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Energy and Natural Resources, Sunyani, Ghana

    Emmanuel K. Nyantakyi

Authors
  1. Shaibu Mohammed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Emmanuel K. Nyantakyi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anthony Morgan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Prosper Anumah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Justice Sarkodie-kyeremeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shaibu Mohammed.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mohammed, S., Nyantakyi, E.K., Morgan, A. et al. Use of relative extra citation counts and uncited publications to enhance the discriminatory power of the h-index. Scientometrics 126, 181–199 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03777-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03777-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation