IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Influence of individual researchers’ visibility on institutional impact: an example of Prathap’s approach to successive h-indices


  • Ricardo Arencibia-Jorge

    (National Scientific Research Center)

  • Ronald Rousseau

    (Industrial Sciences and Technology
    K.U.Leuven, Steunpunt O&O Indicatoren)


This study applies Prathap’s approach to successive h-indices in order to measure the influence of researcher staff on institutional impact. The twelve most productive Cuban institutions related to the study of the human brain are studied. The Hirsch index was used to measure the impact of the institutional scientific output, using the g-index and R-index as complementary indicators. Prathap’s approach to successive h-indices, based on the author-institution hierarchy, is used to determine the institutional impact through the performance of the researcher staff. The combination of different Hirsch-type indices for institutional evaluation is illustrated.

Suggested Citation

  • Ricardo Arencibia-Jorge & Ronald Rousseau, 2009. "Influence of individual researchers’ visibility on institutional impact: an example of Prathap’s approach to successive h-indices," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 79(3), pages 507-516, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:79:y:2009:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-007-2025-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-007-2025-0

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL:
    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

    1. Henri A. Schildt & Juha T. Mattsson, 2006. "A dense network sub-grouping algorithm for co-citation analysis and its implementation in the software tool Sitkis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 67(1), pages 143-163, April.
    2. Frances Ruane & Richard S. J. Tol, 2008. "Rational (successive) h-indices: An application to economics in the Republic of Ireland," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 75(2), pages 395-405, May.
    3. András Schubert, 2007. "Successive h-indices," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(1), pages 201-205, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Cornelius J. König & Clemens B. Fell & Linus Kellnhofer & Gabriel Schui, 2015. "Are there gender differences among researchers from industrial/organizational psychology?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 1931-1952, December.
    2. Ricardo Arencibia-Jorge & Felix Moya-Anegón, 2010. "Challenges in the study of Cuban scientific output," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 83(3), pages 723-737, June.
    3. Ana Paula dos Santos Rubem & Ariane Lima Moura & João Carlos Correia Baptista Soares de Mello, 2015. "Comparative analysis of some individual bibliometric indices when applied to groups of researchers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 1019-1035, January.

    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. 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.
    2. Jerome K. Vanclay & Lutz Bornmann, 2012. "Metrics to evaluate research performance in academic institutions: a critique of ERA 2010 as applied in forestry and the indirect H2 index as a possible alternative," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 751-771, June.
    3. Alireza Abbasi & Jörn Altmann & Junseok Hwang, 2010. "Evaluating scholars based on their academic collaboration activities: two indices, the RC-index and the CC-index, for quantifying collaboration activities of researchers and scientific communities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 83(1), pages 1-13, April.
    4. David L. Anderson & John Tressler, 2013. "The Relevance of the “h-” and “g-” Index to Economics in the Context of A Nation-Wide Research Evaluation Scheme: The New Zealand Case," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 32(1), pages 81-94, March.
    5. Ash Mohammad Abbas, 2011. "Weighted indices for evaluating the quality of research with multiple authorship," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(1), pages 107-131, July.
    6. Georgios Stoupas & Antonis Sidiropoulos & Antonia Gogoglou & Dimitrios Katsaros & Yannis Manolopoulos, 2018. "Rainbow ranking: an adaptable, multidimensional ranking method for publication sets," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 147-160, July.
    7. Judit Bar-Ilan & Mark Levene, 2015. "The hw-rank: an h-index variant for ranking web pages," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(3), pages 2247-2253, March.
    8. Fiorenzo Franceschini & Domenico Maisano, 2012. "Publication and patent analysis of European researchers in the field of production technology and manufacturing systems," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(1), pages 89-100, October.
    9. William Cabos & Juan Miguel Campanario, 2018. "Exploring the Hjif-Index, an Analogue to the H-Like Index for Journal Impact Factors," Publications, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 6(2), pages 1-11, April.
    10. Christian Zimmermann, 2013. "Academic Rankings with RePEc," Econometrics, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 1(3), pages 1-32, December.
    11. Nan Zhang & Shanshan Wan & Peiling Wang & Peng Zhang & Qiang Wu, 2018. "A bibliometric analysis of highly cited papers in the field of Economics and Business based on the Essential Science Indicators database," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(2), pages 1039-1053, August.
    12. Sumita Raghuram & Philipp Tuertscher & Raghu Garud, 2010. "Research Note ---Mapping the Field of Virtual Work: A Cocitation Analysis," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 983-999, December.
    13. 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.
    14. Miguel A. García-Pérez, 2009. "A multidimensional extension to Hirsch’s h-index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(3), pages 779-785, December.
    15. Stelios Katranidis & Theodore Panagiotidis & Costas Zontanos, 2014. "An Evaluation Of The Greek Universities’ Economics Departments," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(2), pages 173-182, April.
    16. Frances P. Ruane & Richard S.J. Tol, 2007. "Academic Quality, Power And Stability: An Application To Economics In The Republic Ireland," Working Papers FNU-148, Research unit Sustainability and Global Change, Hamburg University, revised Sep 2007.
    17. Krisztina Barcza & András Telcs, 2009. "Paretian publication patterns imply Paretian Hirsch index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(2), pages 513-519, November.
    18. Yuxian Liu & Ronald Rousseau, 2009. "Properties of Hirsch-type indices: the case of library classification categories," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 79(2), pages 235-248, May.
    19. Jesus Iñigo & Jose-Alberto Palma & Jorge Iriarte & Elena Urrestarazu, 2013. "Evolution of the publications in clinical neurology: scientific impact of different countries during the 2000–2009 period," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(3), pages 941-952, June.
    20. Yuen-Hsien Tseng & Ming-Yueh Tsay, 2013. "Journal clustering of library and information science for subfield delineation using the bibliometric analysis toolkit: CATAR," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 503-528, May.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:79:y:2009:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-007-2025-0. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: .

    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: .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.