In this work, we propose a new representative
electronegativity
scale χ
DC
based on a statistical analysis of 11 electronegativity
scales associated with electric ionic resonance energy, ionization
potential, electron affinity, polarizability, electric force, average
orbital energy, chemical potential, electrochemical reduction potential,
and electric potential energy. Among these scales, it is the new PE°
electronegativity scale, which relates the reduction potential
E
° to Pauling’s electronegativity scale. The
scale χ
DC
gives more weight to the physicochemical
factors, which influence the electronegativity, but this scale is
not necessarily the best electronegativity scale for the element.
This scale is based on (1) the average of the experimental electronegativity
values; (2) the proximity of an experimental value to the average
given by the difference and the ratio to this average; (3) in critical
cases, the periodicity network of the periods and the groups; and
(4) the periodicity of the sequence of the ratios of the experimental
electronegativity values to the best-selected electronegativity value.
We have also taken as probe scales Nagle’s, Allred and Rochow’s,
Allen’s (Hoffman’s and Politzer’s), PE°,
Gordy’s, and Ghosh’s electronegativity scales in order
to investigate the trend of the physicochemical factors which influence
the electronegativity. With this trend, we have determined zones where
a physicochemical property influences the electronegativity more.
We have also found that physicochemical perturbations such as the
orbital overlap, the stable configurations, the nephelauxetic effect,
the width of the band gap, the ligand field stabilization energy,
the penetration of the orbitals, and the lattice energy influence
the electronegativity. Besides, we have analyzed the exactness of
the electronegativity of the scales through the periodical ranking,
the chemical tripartite separation among ionic, covalent, or metallic
bond (taking into account the amplitude of the metalloid band), and
the physicochemical property of bond force. The representative χ
DC
electronegativity scale is the best in periodicity, followed
by Batsanov’s and Pauling’s scales. In the type of chemical
bond, the ranking depends on the number and kind of compounds in the
sample, but in general, Pauling’s, the ARS, and Batsanov’s
electronegativity scales are the best with a confidence interval of
95%. On the other hand, in the physical bond force, Batsanov’s,
Pauling’s, Mulliken’s, Nagle’s, Allen’s,
the ARS, and the χ
DC
electronegativity scales are
the best scales. Also, we have considered the free atom and the in
situ hypotheses of electronegativity and used the low and high oxidation
states to verify these hypotheses. Besides, as an example of the utility
of this ranking of scales, we have analyzed the relation of lanthanum
La and lutetium Lu to Group 3, lanthanides, and hafnium Hf. We also
analyze the vertic...