Abstract
The \(\alpha\) person is the dominant person in a group. We define the \(\alpha\)-author of a paper as the author of the paper with the highest h-index among all the coauthors, and an \(\alpha\)-paper of a scientist as a paper authored or coauthored by the scientist where he/she is the \(\alpha\)-author. For most but not all papers in the literature there is only one \(\alpha\)-author. We define the \(h_\alpha\) index of a scientist as the number of papers in the h-core of the scientist (i.e. the set of papers that contribute to the h-index of the scientist) where this scientist is the \(\alpha\)-author. We also define the \(h'_\alpha\) index of a scientist as the number of \(\alpha\)-papers of this scientist that have \(\ge\)\(h'_\alpha\) citations. \(h_\alpha\) and \(h'_\alpha\) contain similar information, while \(h'_\alpha\) is conceptually more appealing it is harder to obtain from existing databases, hence of less current practical interest. We propose that the \(h_\alpha\) and/or \(h'_\alpha\) indices, or other variants discussed in the paper, are useful complements to the h-index of a scientist to quantify his/her scientific achievement, that rectify an inherent drawback of the h-index, its inability to distinguish between authors with different coauthorships patterns. A high h index in conjunction with a high \(h_\alpha /h\) ratio is a hallmark of scientific leadership.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
See Alpha (Wikipedia).
See list of Universities classified as “R1: Doctoral Universities Highest Research Activity” in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_research_universities_in_the_United_States. According to this website, “These universities have a very high level of both research activity and per capita in such research activity”.
There are six other theoretical physicists in this department at the rank of Distinguished Professor, all have h-indices higher than 50.
Scientists interested to know whether they are listed in table II can obtain this information from the author upon request.
Private communications (2018).
References
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, 3, 273–289.
Ancheyta, J. (2015). A correction of h-index to account for the relative importance of authors in manuscripts. International Journal of Oil Gas and Coal Technology, 10, 221–232.
Ausloos, M. (2015). Assessing the true role of coauthors in the h-index measure of an author scientific impact. Physica A, 422, 136–142.
Bornmann, L. (2014). h-Index research in scientometrics: A summary. Journal of Informetrics, 8, 478–485.
Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. D. (2007). What do we know about the h index? Journal of the American Socieyt for Information Science and Technology, 58, 1381–1385.
Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H.-D. (2010). The citation speed index: A useful bibliometric indicator to add to the h index. Journal of Informetrics, 4, 444–446.
Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., & Daniel, H. D. (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, 59, 830–837.
Crispo, E. (2015). A new index to use in conjunction with the h-index to account for an author’s relative contribution to publications with high impact. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66, 2381–2383.
Dorta-Gonzalez, P., & Dorta-Gonzalez, M. I. (2011). Central indexes to the citation distribution: A complement to the h-index. Scientometrics, 88, 729–745.
Egghe, L. (2008). Mathematical theory of the h- and \(g\)-index in case of fractional counting of authorship. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59, 1608–1616.
Egghe, L., & Rousseau, R. (2008). An h-index weighted by citation impact. Information Processing and Management, 44, 770–780.
Galam, S. (2011). Tailor based allocations for multiple authorship: A fractional \(gh\)-index. Scientometrics, 89, 365–379.
Gibb, B. C. (2012). Lies, damned lies and h-indices. Nature Chemistry, 4, 513–514.
Guns, R., & Rousseau, R. (2009). Real and rational variants of the h-index and the \(g\)-index. Journal of Informetrics, 3, 64–71.
Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 102, 16569–16572.
Hirsch, J. E. (2010). An index to quantify an individuals scientific research output that takes into account the effect of multiple coauthorship. Scientometrics, 85, 741–754.
Hu, X., Rosseau, R., & Chen, J. (2010). In those fields where multiple authorship is the rule, the h-index should be supplemented by role-based h-indices. Journal of Information Science, 36, 73–85.
Jin, B., Liang, L. M., Rousseau, R., & Egghe, L. (2007). The R- and AR-indices: Complementing the h-index. Chinese Science Bulletin, 52, 863–863.
Lando, T., & Bertoli-Barsotti, L. (2014). New tools for complementing the h-index: An empirical study. Mathematical Methods in Economics, 2014, 566–571.
Liu, X. Z., & Fang, H. (2012). Modifying h-index by allocating credit of multi-authored papers whose author names rank based on contribution. Journal of Informetrics, 6, 557–565.
Mazurek, J. (2018). A modification to Hirsch index allowing comparisons across different scientific fields. Current Science, 114, 2238–2239.
Perry, M., & Reny, P. J. (2016). How to count citations if you must. American Economic Review, 106, 2722–2741.
Prathap, G. (2012). The Inconsistency of the h-index. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63, 1480–1481.
Rousseau, R., & Ye, F. (2008). A proposal for a dynamic h-type index. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59, 1853–1855.
Schreiber, M. (2008). To share the fame in a fair way, \(h_m\) modifies h for multi-authored manuscripts. New Journal of Physics, 10, 040201.
Schreiber, M. (2008). A modification of the h-index: The \(h_m\)-index accounts for multi-authored manuscripts. Journal of Informetrics, 2, 211–216.
Schreiber, M. (2009). A case study of the modified Hirsch index \(h_m\) accounting for multiple coauthors. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60, 1274–1282.
Schreiber, M. (2018). A skeptical view on the Hirsch index and its predictive power. Physica Scripta, 93, 10201.
Tscharntke, T., et al. (2007). Author sequence and credit for contributions in multiauthored publications. PLoS Biology, 5(1), e18.
Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2008). Generalizing the h- and \(g\)-indices. Journal of Informetrics, 2, 263–271.
Van Raan, A. F. J. (2006). Comparison of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judgment for 147 chemistry research groups. Scientometrics, 67, 491–502.
Vavrycuk, V. (2018). Fair ranking of researchers and research teams. PLoS ONE, 13(4), e0195509.
Waltman, L., & Nees, J. (2012). The inconsistency of the h-index. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63, 406–415.
Yaminfirooz, M., & Gholinia, H. (2015). Multiple h-index: A new scientometric indicator. Electronic Library, 33(547), 556.
Zhang, C.-T. (2009). The e-index, complementing the h-index for excess citations. PLoS ONE, 4, e5429.
Acknowledgements
The author is grateful to a colleague for thoughtful comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hirsch, J.E. hα: An index to quantify an individual’s scientific leadership. Scientometrics 118, 673–686 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2994-1
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2994-1