The authors apply a new bibliometric measure, the h ‐index (Hirsch, 2005), to the literature of information science. Faculty rankings based on raw citation counts are compared with those based on h ‐counts. There is a strong positive correlation between the two sets of rankings. It is shown how the h ‐index can be used to express the broad impact of a scholar's research output over time in more nuanced fashion than straight citation counts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cronin et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: