TL;DR
The paper discusses the h-index, a widely used bibliometric measure, highlighting its advantages, criticisms, and the ongoing efforts to develop alternative metrics to address its limitations.
Contribution
It provides an overview of the h-index's usage, critiques, and the initiatives aimed at creating better alternatives for evaluating scholarly impact.
Findings
The h-index combines quantity and impact in a single measure.
It is widely used in academia and research policy.
Various alternatives are being developed to improve upon the h-index.
Abstract
The h-index is a mainstream bibliometric indicator, since it is widely used in academia, research management and research policy. While its advantages have been highlighted, such as its simple calculation, it has also received widespread criticism. The criticism is mainly based on the negative effects it may have on scholars, when the index is used to describe the quality of a scholar. The "h" means "highly-cited" and "high achievement", and should not be confused with the last name of its inventor, Hirsch. Put simply, the h-index combines a measure of quantity and impact in a single indicator. Several initiatives try to provide alternatives to the h-index to counter some of its shortcomings.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.