Scholarlink

<p>The systematic evaluation and ranking of researchers in academia stand out as a challenging and tedious task. This task facilitates policymakers in making informed decisions regarding faculty promotions, awards and providing grants by identifying deserving individuals. Researchers have put forth a range of parameters for identification of the most impactful scholars. These parameters include the count of publications and citations, along with the h-index. However, considering the associated shortcomings of the h-index, the researchers have introduced several variations of the h-index. Fictitious scenarios and datasets will be utilized to evaluate the practical and real-world effectiveness of the proposed metrics. There is a gap that requires a thorough evaluation of the specific behavior of each index. The current study emphasizes the assessment of various indices using a comprehensive dataset that includes both award-winning and non-award-winning researchers. During the evaluation of each index, the retrieval of awardees was examined within the top 10% to top 100% of the ordered list for each respective index. In addition, we investigate the correlation among several indices and awarding societies. Our findings suggest that the A-index and normalized h-index can identify over 60% of award-winning researchers.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Investigating scholarly indices and their contribution to recognition patterns among awarded and non-awarded researchers

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年1月15日

查看全文
  • Bilal Ahmed,
  • Li Wang,
  • Waqar Hussain,
  • Ghulam Mustafa,
  • Muhammad Tanvir Afzal

摘要

The systematic evaluation and ranking of researchers in academia stand out as a challenging and tedious task. This task facilitates policymakers in making informed decisions regarding faculty promotions, awards and providing grants by identifying deserving individuals. Researchers have put forth a range of parameters for identification of the most impactful scholars. These parameters include the count of publications and citations, along with the h-index. However, considering the associated shortcomings of the h-index, the researchers have introduced several variations of the h-index. Fictitious scenarios and datasets will be utilized to evaluate the practical and real-world effectiveness of the proposed metrics. There is a gap that requires a thorough evaluation of the specific behavior of each index. The current study emphasizes the assessment of various indices using a comprehensive dataset that includes both award-winning and non-award-winning researchers. During the evaluation of each index, the retrieval of awardees was examined within the top 10% to top 100% of the ordered list for each respective index. In addition, we investigate the correlation among several indices and awarding societies. Our findings suggest that the A-index and normalized h-index can identify over 60% of award-winning researchers.