Abstract
Drawing from the existing literature on risk and inequality measurement, we implement the notion of “certainty equivalent citation” in order (i) to generalize most of the h-type citation indexes (h-, g-, \(\tilde{g},\) t-, f-, w-index), and (ii) to highlight the centrality of the decision-maker’s preferences on distributive aspects (concentration aversion) for the ranking of citation profiles. In order to highlight the sensitivity of citation orderings with respect to concentration aversion, an application to both simulated and real citation profiles is presented.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
In this paper we do not consider the indexes complementing the h-index (Jin et al. 2007; Zhang 2009) as well as the re-scaling procedures suggested in order to overcome some of the major cons of the h-index (Katsaros et al. 2006; Batista et al. 2006; Jin et al. 2007; Schreiber 2008; Wu 2010; Ellison 2010; Harzing 2011).
As observed in Woeginger (2008b), the \(\tilde{g}\)-index “seems to give the nicest and most natural version of the g-index”.
It is worth observing that the same issue had already been highlighted with respect to mean and median citation rate metrics in Tijssen (2002) and Aksnes and Sivertsen (2004). More recently, in order to account for the skewness of citation distributions, Leydesdorff et al. (2011) and Leydesdorff and Bornmann (2011) have submitted new indicators based on a percentile rank approach, while a quadratic influence function has been proposed in Ravallion and Wagstaff (2011) by which a preference for “diminishing marginal influence of citations” is additionally assumed.
Equivalently, \(x:=\{x_1,\ldots,x_n\}\) is an element of the non-negative part of the n-dimensional Euclidean space with the origin excluded.
In addition, it must be the case that h(x) ≤ w(x) ≤ 2 h(x) (Woeginger 2008a).
References
Aksnes, D., & Sivertsen, G. (2004). The effect of highly cited papers on national citation indicators. Scientometrics, 59, 213–224.
Albarrán, P., Ortuño, I., & Ruiz-Castillo, J. (2011). The measurement of low- and high-impact in citation distributions: Technical results. Journal of Infometrics, 5, 48–63.
Atkinson, A. (1970). On the measurement of inequality. Journal of Economic Theory, 2, 244–263.
Batista, P. D., Campiteli, M. G., & Konouchi, O. (2006). Is it possible to compare researchers with different scientific interests? Scientometrics, 68(1), 179–189.
Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H.-D. (2007). What do we know about the h index? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(9), 1381–1385.
Bornmann, L. (2011). Mimicry in science? Scientometrics, 86, 173–177.
Bouyssou, D., & Marchant, T. (2011). Ranking scientists and departments in a consistent manner. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 62, 1761–1769.
Burgos, A. (2010). Ranking scientists, Rev. Working Paper Series, 2, Departamento de Fundamentos del Anlisis Econmico. Universidad de Murcia, Spagna.
Egghe, L. (2006a). Theory and practise of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69, 131–152.
Egghe, L. (2006b). An improvement of the h-index: The g-index. ISSI Newsletter, 2, 8–9.
Ellison, G. (2010). How does the market use citation data? The Hirsch index in economics. NBER Working Paper No. 16419.
Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2010). Hirsch-type characteristics of the tail of distributions. The generalized h-index. Journal of Infometrics, 4, 118–123.
Harzing, A. W. (2011). Publish or Perish 3.1. http://www.harzing.com/pop.htm.
Hirsch, J. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences United States of America, 102(46), 16569–16572.
Jin, B. H. (2006). H-index: An evaluation indicator proposed by scientist. Science Focus, 1(1), 8–9.
Jin, B. H., Liang, L. M., Rousseau, R., & Egghe, L. (2007). The r- and ar-indices: complementing the h-index. Chinese Science Bulletin, 52, 855–863.
Katsaros, C., Manolopoulos, Y., & Sidiropoulos, A. (2006). Generalized h-index for disclosing latent facts in citation networks. Scientometrics, 72(2), 253–280.
Kosmulski, M. (2006). A new Hirsch-type index saves time and works equally well as the original h-index. ISSI Newsletter, 2, 4–6.
Leydesdorff, L., & Bornmann, L. (2011). Integrated impact indicators compared with impact factors: An alternative research design with policy implications. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62, 2133–2146.
Leydesdorff, L., Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., & Opthof, T. (2011). Turning the tables on citation analysis one more time: Principles for comparing sets of documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62, 1370–1381.
Marchant, T. (2009). An axiomatic characterization of the ranking based on the h-index and some other bibliometric rankings of authors. Scientometrics, 80, 325–342.
Markowitz, H. (1952). Portfolio selection. Journal of Finance, 7, 77–91.
Moed, H. F., Burger, W. J., Frankfort, J. G., & van Raan, A. F. J. (1985). The use of bibliometric data for the measurement of university research performance. Research Policy, 14, 131–149.
Ravallion, M., & Wagstaff, A. (2011). On measuring scholarly influence by citations. Scientometrics, 88, 321–337.
Rousseau, R. (2008). Reflections on recent developments of the h-index and h-type indices. Collnet Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 2, 1–8.
Schreiber, M. (2008). To share the fame in a fair way, hm modifies h for multi-authored manuscripts. New Journal of Physics, 10, 040201.
Schreiber, M. (2010). A new family of old Hirsch index variants. Journal of Infometrics, 4, 647–651.
Schubert, A., Glänzel, W., & Braun, T. (1987). Subject field characteristic citation scores and scales for assessing research performance. Scientometrics, 12, 267–291.
Segalat L. (2009) La science bout de souffle? Seuil, Paris.
Tijssen, R. M., Visser, M., & van Leeuwen, T. (2002). Benchmarking international scientific excellence: Are highly cited research papers an appropriate frame of reference. Scientometrics, 54, 381–397.
Tol, R. S. J. (2009). The h-index and its alternatives: An application to the 100 most prolific economists. Scientometrics, 80, 317–324.
Waltman, L., van Eck, N. J., van Leeuwen, T. N., Visser, M. S., & van Raan, A. F. J. (2011) Towards a new crown indicator: Some theoretical considerations. Journal of Infometrics, 5, 37–47.
Weingart, P. (2005). Impact of bibliometrics upon the science system: Inadvertent consequences? Scientometrics, 62(1), 117–131.
Woeginger, G. J. (2008a). An axiomatic characterization of the Hirsch-index. Mathematical Social Sciences 56, 224–232.
Woeginger, G. J. (2008b). An axiomatic analysis of Egghe’s g-index. Journal of Infometrics, 2, 364–368.
Wu, Q. (2010). The w-index: A significant improvement of the h-index. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 61(3), 609–614.
Zhang, C.-T. (2009). The e-index, complementing the h-index for excess citations. Public Library of Science (PLoS ONE) 4(5), 1–4.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Abatemarco, A., Dell’Anno, R. Certainty equivalent citation: generalized classes of citation indexes. Scientometrics 94, 263–271 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0758-x
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0758-x