Is the h-index the best criterion to select scientists?
by Alberto Boretti
International Journal of Research, Innovation and Commercialisation (IJRIC), Vol. 3, No. 2, 2020

Abstract: Scientists are presently ranked mostly based on the number of their citations and works (h-index). While this criterion is certainly an indicator of popularity, in times of citation farms and hyper-authorship this is not an indication of better knowledge or productivity. Recent works have proposed a more elaborate ranking of scientists also based on the citations in their publication records. This ranking, the Stanford standardised citation metrics, has generated large interest but also stirred controversy. This ranking is here discussed in the context of correct research, innovation, and commercialisation process, where the selection of a candidate to be part of a research team should be made based on the best opportunities for successful outcomes.

Online publication date: Fri, 28-May-2021

The full text of this article is only available to individual subscribers or to users at subscribing institutions.

 
Existing subscribers:
Go to Inderscience Online Journals to access the Full Text of this article.

Pay per view:
If you are not a subscriber and you just want to read the full contents of this article, buy online access here.

Complimentary Subscribers, Editors or Members of the Editorial Board of the International Journal of Research, Innovation and Commercialisation (IJRIC):
Login with your Inderscience username and password:

Username:        Password:          Forgotten your password?

Want to subscribe?
A subscription gives you complete access to all articles in the current issue, as well as to all articles in the previous three years (where applicable). See our Orders page to subscribe.

If you still need assistance, please email subs@inderscience.com