Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Does the h-index for ranking of scientists really work?

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Hirsch (2005) has proposed the h-index as a single-number criterion to evaluate the scientific output of a researcher (Ball, 2005): A scientist has index h if h of his/her Np papers have at least h citations each, and the other (Np − h) papers have fewer than h citations each. In a study on committee peer review (Bornmann & Daniel, 2005) we found that on average the h-index for successful applicants for post-doctoral research fellowships was consistently higher than for non-successful applicants.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich (ETH Zurich), Professorship for Social Psychology and Research on Higher Education, Zähringerstr. 24, CH-8092, Zurich, Switzerland

    Lutz Bornmann

  2. University of Zurich, Evaluation Office, Zurich, Switzerland

    Hans-Dieter Daniel

Authors
  1. Lutz Bornmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hans-Dieter Daniel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bornmann, L., Daniel, HD. Does the h-index for ranking of scientists really work?. Scientometrics 65, 391–392 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0281-4

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0281-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation