h-index, h-type Indices, and the Role of Corrected Quality Ratio

Tahira, Muzammil; Alias, Rose Alinda; Bakri, Arayti; Shabri, Ani

doi:10.1633/jistap.2014.2.4.2

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many scientometric indicators such as h-index, g-index and their variants are introduced for the evaluation of the research performance and got attention of researchers and policy makers (Tahira et al,013). These newly developed indices are formulated based on publication productivity, citations or combinations of both to have a better blend of quantitative and impact core of research performance (Tahira et al, 2014). Strong correlation of number of publications with the number of citations in many scientometric studies has designated the connotation of publication counts.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors influencing scholarly publication productivity: a systematic review

Wahid

Warraich

Tahira

2021

IDD

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The importance of scientific publications has enhanced the research activities at all aggregate levels. The purpose of this paper is to conduct an in-depth review of studies examined the factors that influence the publication productivity among researchers, institutions and countries. Design/methodology/approach This paper uses a systematic literature review approach that is based on relevant literature retrieved from two authentic and well-known databases named Web of Science and SCOPUS. Kitchenham protocol of systematic review was applied, and relevant studies were searched by selected keywords search. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were used to select high quality studies. A rigorous study selection procedure was designed. Findings Findings reveal that several factors play a significant role in the publication productivity growth. All of the identified factors were grouped into three categories. Most of the factors belong to personal category while two top dominant factors, funding and collaboration fall into situational category. Other most influential factors, time, academic rank and academic qualification are personal. Findings highlight that publication output at individual level is strongly influenced by personal factors while few environmental and situational factors also affect the number of publications. Publication productivity of institutes and countries is affected by environmental and situational factors. Originality/value This paper contributes by providing a detailed review to explore the influencing factors of scholarly publication of researchers, institutions and countries. This study will be supportive for researchers and policymakers for making strategies to stimulate the research publication practices at researchers, institutions and national level.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors influencing scholarly publication productivity: a systematic review

Wahid

Warraich

Tahira

2021

IDD

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The indicators that correlate with the productivity variable are the comparison of citations to publications produced, research outputs compared to funds granted, comparisons of granted patents compared to those registered, and research outputs compared to the number of lecturers. The citation to publication ratio is one of the productivity measures in assessing research performance on productivity aspects in terms of “robustness”, “validity”, “functionality”, “cost”, and “implementation time” (Tahira et al ., 2015). A professor publishing many publications on articles also wants a large number of citation responses (Diem and Wolter, 2013).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Research performance evaluation instruments are not suitable enough to meet the needs of all university, given an extensive variety of universities in Indonesia. The suitability of priority indicators for instruments with current policies must therefore be determined (Yang et al ., 2023; Zhou, 2021) by utilizing an integrated (Werner and Souder, 1997) and consistent (Tahira et al ., 2015) combination of indicators.…”

Section: Evaluation At Universities In Indonesiamentioning

confidence: 99%

Research performance evaluation model in university: evidence from Indonesia

Hermanu,

Sari,

Sondari

et al. 2024

IJEM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis research aimed to examine the impact of input, process, output, productivity and outcome variables on university research performance and the indicators that represent them in order to improve academic quality and contribute to government policy.Design/methodology/approachThe quantitative approach was used through a survey method that obtained samples using questionnaires from 150 leaders of research institutions and continued analysis using the structural equation modeling-partial least square (SEM-PLS) to test the developed model.FindingsExcept for the relationship between process and productivity variables, all variable relationships had a positive and significant effect. Furthermore, the input, process, output, productivity and outcome variables each include seven, twelve, four and ten indicators.Research limitations/implicationsThis study has several ramifications because it provides a clear policy input and advances science. As a prelude to developing research performance assessment tools that take into account variances in a tertiary institution, this research aids in the implementation of national policies for assessing research performance in postsecondary institutions.Originality/valueTo improve the accuracy of the information acquired, we conducted a survey among the heads of research units at various higher-ranking Indonesian universities, taking into consideration their skill and experience in leading research organizations and conducting research. Other than that, our belief in the originality of our manuscript is strengthened by the way we applied systems theory to construct a performance evaluation model that examines each contribution made by each system aspect.

show abstract

“…Glanzel and Moed (2002) pointed to the lack of interpretability in Lindsey's approach as one reason why this indicator has found no application. However, in spite of the fact that his papers were not widely cited, it must be noted that Lindsey's indicator was shown to be useful to make the h-index sensitive to hypercited articles (Tahira et al, 2014), and to improve cluster analysis of citation history (Luzar et al, 1992). In 2010, Prathap revisited the Lindsey's indicator defined as .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A new approach to the analysis and evaluation of the research output of countries and institutions

Docampo

Bessoule

2019

Scientometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A plethora of bibliometric indicators is available nowadays to gauge research performance. The spectrum of bibliometric based measures is very broad, from purely size-dependent indicators (e.g. raw counts of scientific contributions and/or citations) up to size-independent measures (e.g. citations per paper, publications or citations per researcher), through a number of indicators that effectively combine quantitative and qualitative features (e.g. the h-index). In this paper we present a straightforward procedure to evaluate the scientific contribution of territories and institutions that combines size-dependent and scale-free measures. We have analysed in the paper the scientific production of 189 countries in the period 2006-2015. Our approach enables effective global and field-related comparative analyses of the scientific productions of countries and academic/research institutions. Furthermore, the procedure helps to identifying strengths and weaknesses of a given country or institution, by tracking variations of performance ratios across research fields. Moreover, by using a straightforward wealth-index, we show how research performance measures are highly associated with the wealth of countries and territories. Given the simplicity of the methods introduced in this paper and the fact that their results are easily understandable by non-specialists, we believe they could become a useful tool for the assessment of the research output of countries and institutions.

show abstract

h-index, h-type Indices, and the Role of Corrected Quality Ratio

Cited by 6 publications

References 37 publications

Factors influencing scholarly publication productivity: a systematic review

Factors influencing scholarly publication productivity: a systematic review

Research performance evaluation model in university: evidence from Indonesia

A new approach to the analysis and evaluation of the research output of countries and institutions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About