Redundancies in H Index Variants and the Proposal of the Number of Top-Cited Papers as an Attractive Indicator

摘要

Ruscio, Seaman, D'Oriano, Stremlo, and Mahalchik (this issue) evaluate 22 bibliometric indicators, including conventional measures, like the number of publications, the h index, and many h index variants. To assess the quality of the indicators, their well-justified criteria encompass conceptual, empirical, and practical issues: ease of understanding, accuracy of calculation, effects on incentives, influence of extreme scores, and validity. Although they found that some indicators are more attractive for research evaluation purposes than others, the correlation between most of the indicators is (very) high. A generally high correlation between the indicators points out a redundant contribution each to each other.