The inconsistency of the h‐index

Ludo Waltman and Nees Jan van Eck

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2012, vol. 63, issue 2, 406-415

Abstract: The h‐index is a popular bibliometric indicator for assessing individual scientists. We criticize the h‐index from a theoretical point of view. We argue that for the purpose of measuring the overall scientific impact of a scientist (or some other unit of analysis), the h‐index behaves in a counterintuitive way. In certain cases, the mechanism used by the h‐index to aggregate publication and citation statistics into a single number leads to inconsistencies in the way in which scientists are ranked. Our conclusion is that the h‐index cannot be considered an appropriate indicator of a scientist's overall scientific impact. Based on recent theoretical insights, we discuss what kind of indicators can be used as an alternative to the h‐index. We pay special attention to the highly cited publications indicator. This indicator has a lot in common with the h‐index, but unlike the h‐index it does not produce inconsistent rankings.

Date: 2012
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (20)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21678

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:bla:jamist:v:63:y:2012:i:2:p:406-415

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1532-2890

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology from Association for Information Science & Technology
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().