基于“相对第一作者”原则的多作者论文h型索引

IF 1.6 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management Pub Date : 2022-07-03 DOI:10.1080/09737766.2022.2098875
R. Aliguliyev, Narmin A. Adigozalova
{"title":"基于“相对第一作者”原则的多作者论文h型索引","authors":"R. Aliguliyev, Narmin A. Adigozalova","doi":"10.1080/09737766.2022.2098875","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recently, the number of multiple authorship and collaborative papers has been growing rapidly. This number differs significantly according to various scientific fields. Known that h-type indices (h-index, gindex, A-index, etc.) are used to evaluate the performance of researchers, which do not distinguish between single-author and multi-author papers in the evaluation process. In other words, a citation received from multi-authored papers is applied to all co-authors (as in the single-authored paper). To solve this problem, several weighted version of the h-index have been proposed. Most of these versions are indices and are based on the division principle of citations based on the co-author’s position in the authors’ order. In other words, according to the position of the co-authors order, the weight is assigned to the co-authors, and the citations are proportionally divided according to co-authors in these weights. Obviously, the calculation of weights is important in this case. h-type indices proposed in the paper are based on the “relative first author” (or “local first author”) principle. “Relative first author” means the co-authors being in the first position relative to the co-authors after him. Based on this principle, existing weighting schemes were modified, and then new weighted h-type indices were proposed for multiple authorship papers according to these weighting schemes. In other words, the “local first author” approach was proposed instead of the “global first author” approach in calculating the h-type indices for multiple authorship papers. The suggested indices were calculated for 30 researchers selected from the Google Scholar database and compared with other relevant h-type indices.","PeriodicalId":10501,"journal":{"name":"COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management","volume":"16 1","pages":"305 - 330"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"h-type indices for multiple authorship papers based on “relative first author” principle\",\"authors\":\"R. Aliguliyev, Narmin A. Adigozalova\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09737766.2022.2098875\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Recently, the number of multiple authorship and collaborative papers has been growing rapidly. This number differs significantly according to various scientific fields. Known that h-type indices (h-index, gindex, A-index, etc.) are used to evaluate the performance of researchers, which do not distinguish between single-author and multi-author papers in the evaluation process. In other words, a citation received from multi-authored papers is applied to all co-authors (as in the single-authored paper). To solve this problem, several weighted version of the h-index have been proposed. Most of these versions are indices and are based on the division principle of citations based on the co-author’s position in the authors’ order. In other words, according to the position of the co-authors order, the weight is assigned to the co-authors, and the citations are proportionally divided according to co-authors in these weights. Obviously, the calculation of weights is important in this case. h-type indices proposed in the paper are based on the “relative first author” (or “local first author”) principle. “Relative first author” means the co-authors being in the first position relative to the co-authors after him. Based on this principle, existing weighting schemes were modified, and then new weighted h-type indices were proposed for multiple authorship papers according to these weighting schemes. In other words, the “local first author” approach was proposed instead of the “global first author” approach in calculating the h-type indices for multiple authorship papers. The suggested indices were calculated for 30 researchers selected from the Google Scholar database and compared with other relevant h-type indices.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10501,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"305 - 330\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09737766.2022.2098875\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09737766.2022.2098875","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

近年来,多作者论文和合作论文的数量迅速增长。根据不同的科学领域,这个数字有很大的不同。已知h型指标(h-index、gindex、A-index等)是用来评价科研人员绩效的,在评价过程中不区分单作者论文和多作者论文。换句话说,来自多作者论文的引用适用于所有共同作者(就像在单作者论文中一样)。为了解决这个问题,提出了几个h指数的加权版本。这些版本大多是索引,并基于基于作者在作者顺序中的共同作者位置的引文划分原则。换句话说,根据共同作者顺序的位置,将权重分配给共同作者,并根据这些权重中的共同作者按比例划分引文。显然,在这种情况下,权重的计算很重要。本文提出的h型指标基于“相对第一作者”(或“局部第一作者”)原则。“相对第一作者”是指共同作者相对于他之后的共同作者处于第一位置。基于这一原则,对现有的加权方案进行了修正,并根据这些加权方案提出了针对多作者论文的加权h型指标。换句话说,在计算多作者论文的h型指标时,建议采用“本地第一作者”方法代替“全球第一作者”方法。从谷歌Scholar数据库中选取30名研究人员计算建议指数,并与其他相关h型指数进行比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
h-type indices for multiple authorship papers based on “relative first author” principle
Recently, the number of multiple authorship and collaborative papers has been growing rapidly. This number differs significantly according to various scientific fields. Known that h-type indices (h-index, gindex, A-index, etc.) are used to evaluate the performance of researchers, which do not distinguish between single-author and multi-author papers in the evaluation process. In other words, a citation received from multi-authored papers is applied to all co-authors (as in the single-authored paper). To solve this problem, several weighted version of the h-index have been proposed. Most of these versions are indices and are based on the division principle of citations based on the co-author’s position in the authors’ order. In other words, according to the position of the co-authors order, the weight is assigned to the co-authors, and the citations are proportionally divided according to co-authors in these weights. Obviously, the calculation of weights is important in this case. h-type indices proposed in the paper are based on the “relative first author” (or “local first author”) principle. “Relative first author” means the co-authors being in the first position relative to the co-authors after him. Based on this principle, existing weighting schemes were modified, and then new weighted h-type indices were proposed for multiple authorship papers according to these weighting schemes. In other words, the “local first author” approach was proposed instead of the “global first author” approach in calculating the h-type indices for multiple authorship papers. The suggested indices were calculated for 30 researchers selected from the Google Scholar database and compared with other relevant h-type indices.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management
COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊最新文献
Mapping of top papers in the subject category of Soil Science Mapping global research on expert systems Research trends in the field of natural language processing : A scientometric study based on global publications during 2001-2020 Classic articles in cervical cancer research : A bibliometric analysis Human and algorithmic decision-making in the personnel selection process: A comparative bibliometric on bias
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1