Impact of $h$-index on authors ranking: An improvement to the h-index for lower-ranked author

TL;DR

This paper examines how different databases affect author rankings based on the h-index and introduces an improved metric, hc, which adds weight to the highest cited paper, benefiting lower-ranked authors.

Contribution

It compares author rankings from Scopus and WoS and proposes hc, an enhanced h-index incorporating the top cited paper, to improve evaluation fairness.

Findings

Scopus generally provides better author rankings than WoS.

The hc metric positively impacts lower-ranked authors across disciplines.

Ranking differences vary between databases depending on discipline.

Abstract

In academia, the research performance of a faculty is either evaluated by the number of publications or the number of citations. Most of the time h-index is widely used during the hiring process or the faculty performance evaluation. The calculation of the h-index is shown in various databases; however, there is no systematic evidence about the differences between them. Here we analyze the publication records of 385 authors from Monash University (Australia) to investigate (i) the impact of different databases like Scopus and WoS on the ranking of authors within a discipline, and (ii) to complement the $h$-index, named $h_c$, by adding the weight of the highest cited paper to the $h$-index of the authors. The results show the positive impact of $h_c$ on the lower-ranked authors in every discipline. Also, Scopus provides an overall better ranking than WoS; however, the ranking varies among Scopus and WoS for disciplines.