Scientometrics cannot offer a simple consistent method for measuring the scientific eminence of individuals. The h-index method introduced by Hirsch was found applicable for evaluating publications of senior scientists with similar publishing features, only. Some simple methods — using the number of citations and journal papers, and the number of citations obtained by the most frequently cited papers — are suggested and tested to demonstrate the advantages and disadvantages of such indexes. The results indicate that calculating scientometric indexes for individuals, self-citations should be excluded and the effect of the different bibliometric features of the field should be taken into account. The correctness of the indexes used for evaluating journal papers of individuals should be investigated also on the individual level.
B.R. Martin and J. Irvine: CERN: past performance and future prospects I. CERN's position in world high-energy physics, Research Policy13 (1984) 183—210.
2.
J.E. Hirsch , An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America102 ( 2005) 16569—72.
3.
P. Ball, Index aims for fair ranking of scientists, Nature436 (2005) 900.
4.
Anonymous, Data point, Science, 309 (2005) 1181.
5.
S. Cole and J.R. Cole, SocialStratification in Science ( University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1973).
6.
E. Garfield, Citation Indexing.Its Theory and Application in Science, Technology and Humanities (Wiley, New York, 1979).
7.
K.D. Roose and C.J. Andersen, A Rating of Graduate Program (American Council on Education , Washington DC, 1970).
8.
D.J. de Solla Price, Little Science, Big Science ( Columbia University Press, New York, 1963).
9.
P. Vinkler, Composite scientometric indicators for evaluating publications of research institutes. In: P. Ingwersen, B. Larsen (eds), Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics (Karolinska University Press, Stockholm, 2005) 615—24. [To be published by Scientometrics .]
10.
C. Oppenheim and S.P. Renn, Highly cited old papers and the reasons why they continue to be cited, Journal of the American Society for Information Science29 (1978 ) 225—31.
P.D. Batista , M.G. Campiteli, O. Kinouchi and A.S. Martinez, Is it possible to compare researchers with different scientific interests? Scientometrics68 (2006) 179—89.
13.
O. Persson , W. Glänzel and R. Danell, Inflationary bibliometric values: the role of scientometric collaboration and the need for relative indicators in evaluative studies, Scientometrics. [Forthcoming.]
14.
A.F.J. van Raan, Comparison of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judgment for 147 chemistry research groups, Scientometrics67 (2006) 491—502.
15.
P. Vinkler , Relations of relative scientometric indicators , Scientometrics58 ( 2003) 687—94.
16.
Bornmann and H.D. Daniel, Does the h-index for ranking of scientists really work? Scientometrics65 (2005) 391—2.
17.
A.F.J. van Raan , Measuring science: capita selecta of current main issues. In: H.F. Moed, W. Glänzel and U. Schmoch (eds), Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research (Kluwer, Dordrecht/ Boston/London, 2004).
