Ranking and identifying influential scientists versus mass producers by the Perfectionism Index

• Published in: Scientometrics Vol. 103; no. 1; pp. 1 - 31
• Main Authors: Sidiropoulos, Antonis, Katsaros, Dimitrios, Manolopoulos, Yannis
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Dordrecht Springer Netherlands 01.04.2015
• Subjects: Computer Science; Information Storage and Retrieval; Library Science; Ranking; Citation analysis; Bibliometrics; h-Index
• ISSN: 0138-9130; 1588-2861
• DOI: 10.1007/s11192-014-1515-0

The concept of h-index has been proposed to easily assess a researcher’s performance with a single number. However, by using only this number, we lose significant information about the distribution of citations per article in an author’s publication list. In this article, we study an author’s citation curve and we define two new areas related to this curve. We call these “penalty areas”, since the greater they are, the more an author’s performance is penalized. We exploit these areas to establish new indices, namely Perfectionism Index and eXtreme Perfectionism Index (XPI), aiming at categorizing researchers in two distinct categories: “influentials” and “mass producers”; the former category produces articles which are (almost all) with high impact, and the latter category produces a lot of articles with moderate or no impact at all. Using data from Microsoft Academic Service, we evaluate the merits mainly of PI as a useful tool for scientometric studies. We establish its effectiveness into separating the scientists into influentials and mass producers; we demonstrate its robustness against self-citations, and its uncorrelation to traditional indices. Finally, we apply PI to rank prominent scientists in the areas of databases, networks and multimedia, exhibiting the strength of the index in fulfilling its design goal.