The publication performance of 30 scientometricians is studied. The individuals are classified into 3 cohorts according to their manifested professional recognition, as P rice medalists ( P m), members of the editorial board of S cientometrics and the J ournal of I nformetrics ( R w), and session chairs ( S c) at an I nternational S ociety of S cientometrics and I nformetrics ( ISSI ) conference. Several core impact indicators are calculated: h , g , π , citation distribution score ( CDS ) , percentage rank position ( PRP ) , and weight of influence of papers ( WIP 10 ). The indices significantly correlate with each other. The mean value of the indices of the cohorts decreases parallel with the decrease in professional recognition: P m > R w > S c. The 30 scientometricians studied were clustered according to the core impact indices. The members in the clusters so obtained overlap only partly with the members in the cohorts made by professional recognition. The T otal O verlap is calculated by dividing the sum of the diagonal elements in the cohorts‐clusters matrix with the total number of elements, times 100. The highest overlap (76.6%) was obtained with the g‐index. Accordingly, the g‐index seems to have the greatest discriminative power in the system studied. The cohorts‐clusters method may be used for validating scientometric indicators.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Péter Vinkler (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: