چکیده:
To test the reasonability of applying journal-specific indicators with the purpose of
evaluating individual researchers, the present study attempted to examine the structural
similarities between journal-evaluation indicators (i.e. JIF, SNIP and SJR) and authorevaluation
ones (i.e. publication counts, citation per paper, and H and G indices) through
factor analysis. The Iranian papers having published in SCI in 2008 were chosen as the
corpus of this study to be analyzed. The results showed that the author- and journalevaluation
indicators belong to two totally different factor groups, and share no
structures. On this basis, one may conclude that what the journal- evaluation indices
evaluate is completely different from what the author-level ones do. It would be,
therefore, illogical to use these two groups of indices interchangeably and for purposes
they have not been designed for. Otherwise, consistent results cannot be expected to come
out of such endeavors.
خلاصه ماشینی:
The results showed that the author- and journal- evaluation indicators belong to two totally different factor groups, and share no structures.
g. between the number of publications and citations (Lightfield, 1971; Cole & Cole, 1967; Katz, 1999), the H-index on the one hand and citation counts, publication counts, G-index and CPP, on the other (Saad, 2006; Van Raan, 2006; Cronin & Meho, 2006; Kelly & Jennions, 2006; Schreiber, 2010; Vanclay, 2008; Harding & van der Wal, 2009; Tol, 2009).
To do so, choosing Iranian researchers' scientific outputs indexed in SCI in 2008, the present study seeks to examine the structural similarities between journal-evaluation criteria (including Two-Year impact factor (2Y-IF), Five-Year Impact Factor (5Y-IF), SJR and SNIP) and individual-researcher-evaluation indicators (including Paper counts (P), Citation counts (C), Citation per Paper (CPP), H index and G index) via factor analysis and thereby to test the consistency of evaluation results based on the two groups of criteria.
The selection of the Iranian academic community is based on the fact that despite the call for cautious application of scientometric methods (Amani & Baba-Ahmadi, 2005; Davari Ardakani, 2007), it widely embraces such journal-evaluation indicators as IF or SNIP as a basis for decision-making about authors, with less than enough sensitivity or critical attitude.
For instance, the total number of citations in Agricultural Science, Microbiology and Plants & Animal Science shows significant factor loadings on both the author- and journal-evaluation indicators.
The results of the present study showed that the G-index is the strongest of all the researcher-evaluation indices whether at the subject level or in general.