The H-index is an unreliable research metric for evaluating the publication impact of experimental scientists :  Evaluating publication impact from experimental work

Research metrics are often used to assess the reputation of scientists. One commonly employed research metric is the H-index. It measures the publication impact of scientists. But how is it conceivable for a scientist with no distinguished track record in an experimental field to generate greater publication impact than prize-winning scientists? The answer, by resorting to a publishing strategy which places less focus on experimental innovations. I make the case here that the H-index is an abysmal metric for evaluating experimental researchers and that an alternative experiment-oriented metric is sorely needed to quantitate the work of experimental scientists.

Content

Author and article information

Journal

Title: ScienceOpen Preprints

Publisher: ScienceOpen

Publication date (Electronic preprint): 4 February 2024

Affiliations

[1 ] UAE University ( https://ror.org/01km6p862)

Author notes

[* ]Email: mk.akhtar@ 123456uaeu.ac.ae .

Author information

M. Kalim Akhtar https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8805-0373

Article

DOI: 10.14293/PR2199.000690.v1

SO-VID: 7f281714-cca4-4620-bd73-0729f8e74647

License:

This work has been published open access under Creative Commons Attribution License CC BY 4.0 , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Conditions, terms of use and publishing policy can be found at www.scienceopen.com .

History

Date received : 4 February 2024

Funding

Funded by: funder-id http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100006013, United Arab Emirates University;

Award ID: UPAR 12S011

References

Akbashev Andrew R., Kalinin Sergei V.. Tackling overpublishing by moving to open-ended papers. Nature Materials. Vol. 22(3):270–271. 2023. Springer Science and Business Media LLC. [Cross Ref]
Chapman Colin A., Bicca-Marques Júlio César, Calvignac-Spencer Sébastien, Fan Pengfei, Fashing Peter J., Gogarten Jan, Guo Songtao, Hemingway Claire A., Leendertz Fabian, Li Baoguo, Matsuda Ikki, Hou Rong, Serio-Silva Juan Carlos, Chr. Stenseth Nils. Games academics play and their consequences: how authorship,<i>h</i>-index and journal impact factors are shaping the future of academia. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. Vol. 286(1916)2019. The Royal Society. [Cross Ref]
Koltun Vladlen, Hafner David. The h-index is no longer an effective correlate of scientific reputation. PLOS ONE. Vol. 16(6)2021. Public Library of Science (PLoS). [Cross Ref]
Oransky Ivan, Marcus Adam, Abritis Alison. How bibliometrics and school rankings reward unreliable science. BMJ. 2023. BMJ. [Cross Ref]

Comments

Comment on this article

[1] Akbashev Andrew R., Kalinin Sergei V.. Tackling overpublishing by moving to open-ended papers. Nature Materials. Vol. 22(3):270–271. 2023. Springer Science and Business Media LLC. [Cross Ref]

[2] Chapman Colin A., Bicca-Marques Júlio César, Calvignac-Spencer Sébastien, Fan Pengfei, Fashing Peter J., Gogarten Jan, Guo Songtao, Hemingway Claire A., Leendertz Fabian, Li Baoguo, Matsuda Ikki, Hou Rong, Serio-Silva Juan Carlos, Chr. Stenseth Nils. Games academics play and their consequences: how authorship,<i>h</i>-index and journal impact factors are shaping the future of academia. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. Vol. 286(1916)2019. The Royal Society. [Cross Ref]

[3] Koltun Vladlen, Hafner David. The h-index is no longer an effective correlate of scientific reputation. PLOS ONE. Vol. 16(6)2021. Public Library of Science (PLoS). [Cross Ref]

[4] Oransky Ivan, Marcus Adam, Abritis Alison. How bibliometrics and school rankings reward unreliable science. BMJ. 2023. BMJ. [Cross Ref]

The H-index is an unreliable research metric for evaluating the publication impact of experimental scientists : Evaluating publication impact from experimental work