The pros and cons of computing the h‐index using Google Scholar

Péter Jacsó

121 citations0/0 files storedOnline Information Review

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

scientometrics and bibliometrics research Psychology Research and Bibliometrics Web visibility and informetrics

Abstract

Purpose A previous paper by the present author described the pros and cons of using the three largest cited reference enhanced multidisciplinary databases and discussed and illustrated in general how the theoretically sound idea of the h‐index may become distorted depending on the software and the content of the database(s) used, and the searchers' skill and knowledge of the database features. The aim of this paper is to focus on Google Scholar (GS), from the perspective of calculating the h‐index for individuals and journals. Design/methodology/approach A desk‐based approach to data collection is used and critical commentary is added. Findings The paper shows that effective corroboration of the h‐index and its two component indicators can be done only on persons and journals with which a researcher is intimately familiar. Corroborative tests must be done in every database for important research. Originality/value The paper highlights the very time‐consuming process of corroborating data, tracing and counting valid citations and points out GS's unscholarly and irresponsible handling of data.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 121 citations exist upstream.

References

2005An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output 2007Does the h index have predictive power?2007Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of science versus scopus and google scholar 2007Which h-index? — A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar 2007Comparing alternatives to the Web of Science for coverage of the social sciences’ literature 2006Using the h ‐index to rank influential information scientistss 2006The Depth and Breadth of Google Scholar: An Empirical Study 2007On the robustness of the h‐index

Cited by

2010The h‐index: a broad review of a new bibliometric indicator 2010Accuracy and completeness of publication and citation records in the Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar: A case study for the computation of h indices in Psychology 2009Ranking marketing journals using the Google Scholar-based hg-index 2018Researcher and Author Impact Metrics: Variety, Value, and Context 2009Calculating the h‐index and other bibliometric and scientometric indicators from Google Scholar with the Publish or Perish software

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.