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

Shaibu Mohammed (), Emmanuel K. Nyantakyi, Anthony Morgan, Prosper Anumah and Justice Sarkodie-kyeremeh
Additional contact information
Shaibu Mohammed: University of Energy and Natural Resources
Emmanuel K. Nyantakyi: University of Energy and Natural Resources
Anthony Morgan: University of Energy and Natural Resources
Prosper Anumah: University of Energy and Natural Resources
Justice Sarkodie-kyeremeh: University of Energy and Natural Resources

Scientometrics, 2021, vol. 126, issue 1, No 8, 199 pages

Abstract: 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.

Keywords: Author-level metric; h-index; c-index; Relative extra citation counts; Uncited publications (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-020-03777-y Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:scient:v:126:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-020-03777-y

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11192

DOI: 10.1007/s11192-020-03777-y

Access Statistics for this article

Scientometrics is currently edited by Wolfgang Glänzel

More articles in Scientometrics from Springer, Akadémiai Kiadó
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().