An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output that takes into account the effect of multiple coauthorship

By Jorge E. Hirsch. Scientometrics, 2009

381 citations recorded by the source corpus.

I propose the index $$\hbar$$ (“hbar”), defined as the number of papers of an individual that have citation count larger than or equal to the $$\hbar$$ of all coauthors of each paper, as a useful index to characterize the scientific output of a researcher that takes into account the effect of multiple authorship. The bar is higher for $$\hbar.$$

Subfields: Information Systems and Management, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/aa4cf0c6dacf7c63f8085f8f358d2c51433b1ad9

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Information Systems and Management

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

A review of the literature on citation impact indicators (2015, background): “A more complex proposal is made by Hirsch (2010), who introduces a variant of the h-index referred to as the h-bar-index.”
h-Index: A review focused in its variants, computation and standardization for different scientific fields (2009, methodology): “For this reason, Hirsch (2005) already proposed dividing the h-index by number of years since a scientist's first publication and called it the m-quotient.”
Personalized Search (2015, background): “The index works for scientists working in the same field, but may be misleading across different research communities [21].”
Measuring user influence on Twitter: A survey (2015, background): “G e n e r a l Closeness [50] limited request Betweenness [61] limited request H -index [55] O ( T + n ) Velocity [43] O ( T ) B a s e d o n m e tr i c s o r P ag e R a n k Retweet Impact [99] O ( T · k ) Mention Impact [99] O ( T · k ) [51] limited request IP Inﬂuence [111] limited request TunkRank…”
The natural selection of bad science (2016, background): “Output may be combined with impact—some researchers place emphasis on metrics such the h-index, defined as the largest number h such that an individual has h publications with at least h citations each [40].”
Which h-index? — A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar (2008, methodology): “The new bibliometric measure, the h-index was introduced by Jorge Hirsch in August 2005 [HIRSCH, 2005A, B], and it is defined as follows A scientist has index h if h of his/her Np papers have at least h citations each, and the other (Np í h) papers have no more than h citations each [HIRSCH, 2005B…”
Emerging trends and new developments in information science: a document co-citation analysis (2009–2016) (2018, background): “Since Jorge Hirsch (2005) proposed the h-index, is has drawn increasingly higher attention by researchers, among which Egghe (2006), Jin et al. (2007), Bornmann and Daniel (2008), Bornmann et al. (2011), and Waltman and Van Eck (2012a) have a relatively large inﬂuence.”
Reputation and impact in academic careers (2013, neutral): “[52] Hirsch JE (2005) An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output.”
Statistical analysis of the social network and discussion threads in slashdot (2008, methodology): “We propose to quantify the degree of controversy associated to a post using an adapted version of the h-index [9], commonly used to characterize the scientific output of researchers.”