IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v114y2018i3d10.1007_s11192-017-2625-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Year based EM-index: a new approach to evaluate the scientific impact of scholars

Author

Listed:
  • Anand Bihari

    (National Institute of Technology Patna)

  • Sudhakar Tripathi

    (National Institute of Technology Patna)

Abstract

In the research community, generally the assessment of scholarly impact of an individual is based on citation counts of publications. Instead of this a different approach, year based h-indices have been developed based on different parameters such as total number of publications in year, total citation count earned by all the publications published in a particular year and the total number of citations earned in a particular year by all the publications which are published in any year. This index used the concept of original h-index to determine the index value. But the h-index suffers with big hit problems and the year based indices do not account the h-index big hit problems. To overcome this limitation of year based indices, we have extend the year based h-index with the EM-index and have defined a new approach named year based EM-index with three variants, which are year based EM-index by publications, publication year citations count and citation year citations. This year based EM-index considers only the h-core articles for scientific evaluation, but all those year based indices do not consider all items which have been occurring at least one time. To overcome this limitation of year based EM-index, we have extended the year based EM-index with $$\hbox {EM}^{'}$$ EM ′ -index and have defined year based $$\hbox {EM}^{'}$$ EM ′ -index, that consider all the items which occur at least one time. To legitimate the proposed method, an experimental study has been made on 89 scientists publication data, who are working in scientiometrics and bibliometrics fields. The experimental results show the capabilities of the year based EM-index and $$\hbox {EM}^{'}$$ EM ′ -index over the year based h-indices.

Suggested Citation

  • Anand Bihari & Sudhakar Tripathi, 2018. "Year based EM-index: a new approach to evaluate the scientific impact of scholars," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 1175-1205, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:114:y:2018:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2625-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-017-2625-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-017-2625-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-017-2625-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dilruba Mahbuba & Ronald Rousseau, 2013. "Year-based h-type indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(3), pages 785-797, September.
    2. Lutz Bornmann & Rüdiger Mutz & Hans‐Dieter Daniel, 2008. "Are there better indices for evaluation purposes than the h index? A comparison of nine different variants of the h index using data from biomedicine," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 59(5), pages 830-837, March.
    3. Roberto Todeschini, 2011. "The j-index: a new bibliometric index and multivariate comparisons between other common indices," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 621-639, June.
    4. Lorna Wildgaard & Jesper W. Schneider & Birger Larsen, 2014. "A review of the characteristics of 108 author-level bibliometric indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 125-158, October.
    5. Leo Egghe, 2006. "Theory and practise of the g-index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 69(1), pages 131-152, October.
    6. Chun-Ting Zhang, 2009. "The e-Index, Complementing the h-Index for Excess Citations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(5), pages 1-4, May.
    7. Costas, Rodrigo & Bordons, María, 2007. "The h-index: Advantages, limitations and its relation with other bibliometric indicators at the micro level," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 193-203.
    8. Anand Bihari & Sudhakar Tripathi, 2017. "EM-index: a new measure to evaluate the scientific impact of scientists," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(1), pages 659-677, July.
    9. Alonso, S. & Cabrerizo, F.J. & Herrera-Viedma, E. & Herrera, F., 2009. "h-Index: A review focused in its variants, computation and standardization for different scientific fields," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 273-289.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xiaomei Bai & Fuli Zhang & Jinzhou Li & Zhong Xu & Zeeshan Patoli & Ivan Lee, 2021. "Quantifying scientific collaboration impact by exploiting collaboration-citation network," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 7993-8008, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anand Bihari & Sudhakar Tripathi & Akshay Deepak, 2021. "Iterative weighted EM and iterative weighted EM′-index for scientific assessment of scholars," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 5551-5568, July.
    2. Deming Lin & Tianhui Gong & Wenbin Liu & Martin Meyer, 2020. "An entropy-based measure for the evolution of h index research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2283-2298, December.
    3. Yu Liu & Wei Zuo & Ying Gao & Yanhong Qiao, 2013. "Comprehensive geometrical interpretation of h-type indices," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(2), pages 605-615, August.
    4. Kuan, Chung-Huei & Huang, Mu-Hsuan & Chen, Dar-Zen, 2011. "Ranking patent assignee performance by h-index and shape descriptors," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 303-312.
    5. Giovanni Anania & Annarosa Caruso, 2013. "Two simple new bibliometric indexes to better evaluate research in disciplines where publications typically receive less citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(2), pages 617-631, August.
    6. Chen, Meiqian & Guo, Zhaoxia & Dong, Yucheng & Chiclana, Francisco & Herrera-Viedma, Enrique, 2021. "Citations optimal growth path: A tool to analyze sensitivity to citations of h-like indexes," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    7. Wei, Shelia X. & Tong, Tong & Rousseau, Ronald & Wang, Wanru & Ye, Fred Y., 2022. "Relations among the h-, g-, ψ-, and p-index and offset-ability," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).
    8. Nadia Simoes & Nuno Crespo, 2020. "A flexible approach for measuring author-level publishing performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 331-355, January.
    9. Lorna Wildgaard, 2015. "A comparison of 17 author-level bibliometric indicators for researchers in Astronomy, Environmental Science, Philosophy and Public Health in Web of Science and Google Scholar," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 873-906, September.
    10. Lorna Wildgaard & Jesper W. Schneider & Birger Larsen, 2014. "A review of the characteristics of 108 author-level bibliometric indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 125-158, October.
    11. Franceschini, Fiorenzo & Maisano, Domenico, 2010. "The citation triad: An overview of a scientist's publication output based on Ferrers diagrams," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 503-511.
    12. Sidiropoulos, A. & Gogoglou, A. & Katsaros, D. & Manolopoulos, Y., 2016. "Gazing at the skyline for star scientists," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 789-813.
    13. Zhenbin Yan & Qiang Wu & Xingchen Li, 2016. "Do Hirsch-type indices behave the same in assessing single publications? An empirical study of 29 bibliometric indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1815-1833, December.
    14. Lathabai, Hiran H., 2020. "ψ-index: A new overall productivity index for actors of science and technology," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4).
    15. Parul Khurana & Kiran Sharma, 2022. "Impact of h-index on author’s rankings: an improvement to the h-index for lower-ranked authors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4483-4498, August.
    16. Brandão, Luana Carneiro & Soares de Mello, João Carlos Correia Baptista, 2019. "A multi-criteria approach to the h-index," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 276(1), pages 357-363.
    17. Anand Bihari & Sudhakar Tripathi, 2017. "EM-index: a new measure to evaluate the scientific impact of scientists," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(1), pages 659-677, July.
    18. Kuan, Chung-Huei & Huang, Mu-Hsuan & Chen, Dar-Zen, 2011. "Positioning research and innovation performance using shape centroids of h-core and h-tail," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 515-528.
    19. Anania, Giovanni & Caruso, Annarosa, 2012. "Two New Simple Bibliometric Indexes to Better Evaluate Research in Economics," 2012 First Congress, June 4-5, 2012, Trento, Italy 124116, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    20. Debarshi Kumar Sanyal & Sumana Dey & Partha Pratim Das, 2020. "gm-index: a new mentorship index for researchers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(1), pages 71-102, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:114:y:2018:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2625-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.