You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Reflections around ‘the cautionary use’ of the h-index: response to Teixeira da Silva and Dobránszki
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientometrics, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11192-018-2683-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rodrigo Costas, Thomas Franssen |
| Abstract |
In a recent Letter to the Editor Teixeira da Silva and Dobránszki (2018) present a discussion of the issues regarding the h-index as an indicator for the evaluation of individual scholars, particularly in the current landscape of the proliferation of online sources that provide individual level bibliometric indicators. From our point of view, the issues surrounding the h-index go far beyond the problems mentioned by TSD. In this letter we provide some overview of this, mostly by expanding TSD's original argument and discussing more conceptual and global issues related to the indicator, particularly in the outlook of a strong proliferation of online sources providing individual researcher indicators. Our discussion focuses on the h-index and the profusion of sources providing it, but we emphasize that many of our points are of a more general nature, and would be equally relevant for other indicators that reach the same level of popularity as the h-index. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 4 | 25% |
| Colombia | 2 | 13% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 13% |
| Taiwan | 1 | 6% |
| Indonesia | 1 | 6% |
| Germany | 1 | 6% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 6% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 3 | 19% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 50% |
| Scientists | 7 | 44% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 34 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 21% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Librarian | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 7 | 21% |
| Unknown | 8 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 7 | 21% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 12% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 9% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 15% |
| Unknown | 8 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 January 2021.
All research outputs
#2,975,969
of 23,026,672 outputs
Outputs from Scientometrics
#627
of 2,691 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,216
of 332,340 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientometrics
#19
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,026,672 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,691 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 332,340 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.