Abstract
The ability of g-index and h-index to discriminate between different types of scientists (low producers, big producers, selective scientists and top scientists) is analysed in the area of Natural Resources at the Spanish CSIC (WoS, 1994–2004). Our results show that these indicators clearly differentiate low producers and top scientists, but do not discriminate between selective scientists and big producers. However, g-index is more sensitive than h-index in the assessment of selective scientists, since this type of scientist shows in average a higher g-index/h-index ratio and a better position in g-index rankings than in the h-index ones. Current research suggests that these indexes do not substitute each other but that they are complementary.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ball, P. (2005), Index aims for fair ranking of scientists. Nature, 436 (7053): 900.
Batista, P. D., Campiteli, M. G., Kinouchi, O., Martinez, A. S. (2006), It is possible to compare researchers with different scientific interests? Scientometrics, 68 (1): 179–189.
Bordons, M., Barrigon, S. (1992), Bibliometric analysis of publication of Spanish pharmacologists in the SCI (1984–1989). 2. Contribution to subfields other than pharmacology and pharmacy (ISI). Scientometrics, 25 (3): 425–446
Bornmann, L., Daniel, H.-D., (2005), Does the h-index for ranking of scientists really work? Scientometrics, 65 (3): 391–392.
Braun, T., Glänzel, W., Schubert, A. (2006), A Hirsch-type index for journals. Scienotmetrics, 69 (1): 169–173.
Cole, J., Cole, S. (1973). Social Stratification in Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Cole, S., Cole, J. R. (1967), Scientific output and recognition: a study in the operation of the reward system in science. American Sociological Review, 32 (3): 377–390.
Costas, R., Bordons, M. (2005), Bibliometric indicators at the micro-level: some results in the area of natural resources at the Spanish CSIC. Research Evaluation, 14 (2): 110–120.
Costas, R., Bordons, M. (2007), The h-index: advantages, limitations and its relation with other bibliometric indicators at the micro-level. Journal of Informetrics, 1 (3): 193–203.
Cronin, B., Meho, L. (2006), Using the h-index to rank influential information scientists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57 (9): 1275–1278.
Egghe, L. (2006), Theory and practise of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69 (1): 131–152.
Glanzel, W. (2006), On the h-index — A mathematical approach to a new measure of publication activity and citation impact. Scientometrics, 67 (2): 315–321.
Hirsch, J. E. (2005), An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102 (46): 16569–16572.
Jin, B., Liang, L., Rousseau, R., Egghe, L. (2007), The R-and AR-indices: Complementing the h-index. Chinese Science Bulletin, 52 (6): 855–863.
Kelly, C. D., Jennions, M. D. (2006), The h-index and career assessment by numbers. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 21 (4): 167–170.
Lewison, G., Cottrell, R., Dixon, D. (1999), Bibliometric indicators to assist the peer review process in grant decisions. Research Evaluation, 8 (1): 47–52.
Martin, B. R. (1996), The use of multiple indicators in the assessment of basic research. Scientometrics, 36 (3): 343–362.
Moed, H. F. (2000), Bibliometric indicators reflect publication and management strategies. Scientometrics, 47 (2): 323–346.
Moed, H. F. (2005), Hirsch-index is a creative and appealing construct but be cautious when using it to evaluate individual scholars. http://www.cwts.nl/moed/Comments_on_Hirsch_Index_2005_12_16.pdf. Accessed 23/6/2006.
Oppenheim, C. (2007), Using h-index to rank influential British researchers in information science and librarianship. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58 (2): 297–301.
Saad, G. (2006), Exploring the h-index at the author and journal levels using bibliometric data of productive consumer scholar and business-related journals respectively. Scientometrics, 69 (1): 117–120.
Schubert, A., Braun, T. (1986), Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact. Scientometrics, 6 (5–6): 281–291.
Sidiropoulos, A., Katsaros, D., Manolopoulos, Y. (2007), Generalized h-index for disclosing latent facts in citation networks. Scientometrics 72 (2): 253–280.
van Leeuwen, T. N., Visser, M. S., Moed, H. F., Nederhor, T. J., van Raan, A. F. J. (2003), The Holy Grail of science policy: Exploring and combining bibliometric tools in search of scientific excellence. Scientometrics, 57 (2): 257–280.
van Raan, A. F. J. (2006), Comparisons of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judment for 147 chemistry research groups. Scientometrics, 67 (3): 491–502.
Vinkler, P. (2007), Eminence of scientists in the light of h-index and other scientometric indicators. Journal of Information Science, 33 (4): 481–491.
Weingart, P. (2005), Impact of bibliometrics upon the science system: inadverted consequences? Scientometrics, 62 (1): 117–131.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Costas, R., Bordons, M. Is g-index better than h-index? An exploratory study at the individual level. Scientometrics 77, 267–288 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1997-0
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1997-0