2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2011.01.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A multilevel meta-analysis of studies reporting correlations between the h index and 37 different h index variants

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
172
1
5

Year Published

2011
2011
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 251 publications
(186 citation statements)
references
References 76 publications
(71 reference statements)
2
172
1
5
Order By: Relevance
“…In other words, it evaluates if a particular article is cited by relevant articles. Therefore, it provides a more comprehensive and refined picture of the performance of an article (Bornmann, Mutz, Hug, & Daniel, 2011).…”
Section: An Overview Of Apjm's Performance Based On Journal Metricsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In other words, it evaluates if a particular article is cited by relevant articles. Therefore, it provides a more comprehensive and refined picture of the performance of an article (Bornmann, Mutz, Hug, & Daniel, 2011).…”
Section: An Overview Of Apjm's Performance Based On Journal Metricsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Az eddig bemutatott indexeken kívül a Hirsch-indexnek még számos egyéb vál-tozata létezik. Az érdeklődők figyelmébe ajánlom Bornmann et al [2011] cikkét, amelynek 1. táblázata a h-index harminchét különböző változatát tartalmazza, elő-nyös tulajdonságaik szerinti kategóriákba rendezve őket. Hirsch szerint még nem sikerült a h-indexnél egyértelműen jobb (széles körben elterjedt) mutatót kitalálni a tudományos teljesítmény mérésére, melynek oka az index egyszerűségében rejlik (Hirsch-Buela-Casal [2014]).…”
Section: A Hirsch-index Néhány Változataunclassified
“…These methods are useful for showing the strong relationships among them, especially at journal level (Bollen, Van de Sompel, Hagberg, & Chute, 2009;Bornmann, Mutz, Hug, & Daniel, 2011;Costas, van Leeuwen, & Bordons, 2010;Leydesdorff, 2009;Yu & Lee, 2008), and the results could show the usability of centrality measures as a new bibliometric indicator (Leydesdorff, 2009).…”
Section: Background and Purposementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The studies that compare various indicators to find an effective indicator have increased (Bollen, Van de Sompel, Hagberg, & Chute, 2009;Bornmann, Mutz, Hug, & Daniel, 2011;Costas, van Leeuwen, & Bordons, 2010;Kim & Lee, 2010;Lee, 2011;Leydesdorff, 2009;Yu & Lee, 2008). The analysis methods are correlation analysis, factor analysis, or MDS.…”
Section: Previous Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%