Author citation metrics in paleontology: the h-index and the c-score

The so-called “Stanford ranking” (SR) of standardized citation indicators is based on the calculation of an individual scientist’s c-score, a composite index that addresses the main shortcomings of the h-index. This ranking is updated annually and includes the top 100000 ranked scientists, as well as those within the top 2% in each specialty. This paper focuses on the 500 paleontologists featured in the SR (SR-paleontologists) and compares their h-index, c-score, and other productivity and citation variables relevant to these performance metrics. The analysis is subdivided into three main aspects: geographical distribution, general statistical characterization, and relationships among the relevant variables. Geographically, SR-paleontologists are concentrated mostly in North America and central-northern Europe. A typical SR-paleontologist has a career spanning 41 years and has published 165 papers: 51 as first or single author (author), 69 as intermediate author (collaborator), and 45 as last author (manager). This representative paleontologist has received 9402 citations (17% self-citations): 2734 as author, 4720 as collaborator, and 1948 as manager. The average h-index of an SR-paleontologist is 47, and the mean c-score is 3.65. These indices are only weakly correlated and are not significantly affected by career duration. SR-paleontologists are ranked very differently depending on whether the h-index or the c-score is used. Those with high h-indices (h-paleontologists) tend to have more total papers and citations—especially as collaborators and managers—and higher self-citation rates. In contrast, SR-paleontologists with high c-scores (c-paleontologists) tend to have fewer papers and citations overall, lower self-citation rates, and a greater proportion of citations as authors than as collaborators or managers. It is recommended that the database be extended to include the full paleontological community to enable a more comprehensive appraisal of citation performance and to better inform future evaluation processes.