Superiority of the $h$-index over the Impact Factor for Physics
| dc.creator | Miller, Casey W. | |
| dc.date | 2006-08-17 | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2026-07-07T07:25:50Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2026-07-07T07:25:50Z | |
| dc.description | Focusing specifically on physics periodicals, I show that the journal Impact Factor is not correlated with Hirsch's $h$-index. This implies that the Impact Factor is not a good measure of research quality or influence because the $h$-index is a reflection of peer review, and thus a strong indicator of research quality. The impact gap between multidisciplinary journals and physics-only journals is significantly reduced when $h$ is used instead of the Impact Factor. Additionally, the impact of journals specializing in review articles is inherently deflated using $h$ because of the limited number of annual publications in such periodicals. Finally, a reordering of the top ranking journals occurs with $h$ when only the physics articles of multidisciplinary journals are considered, falling more in line with the average physicist's interpretation of a journal's prestige. | |
| dc.description | 4 pages, 3 figures; Submitted to Am. J. Phys. (cordially rejected by Nat. Phys.) | |
| dc.identifier | https://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0608183 | |
| dc.identifier | http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0608183 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://salesiana.dossiersoluciones.com/handle/123456789/116863 | |
| dc.subject | Physics and Society | |
| dc.subject | Astrophysics | |
| dc.subject | Other Condensed Matter | |
| dc.subject | History and Overview | |
| dc.title | Superiority of the $h$-index over the Impact Factor for Physics | |
| dc.type | text |