Impact Indicators of Scholars Related to Research Topics

Abstract Purpose Scientometric indicators provide a more comprehensive assessment of scientists and organizations. Conventional (e.g. the h-index) and alternative indexes are available to carry out these evaluations. Despite their advantages these indexes do not differentiate articles published by an author in different fields of research and they do not facilitate identification of the impact of an author's most cited articles in specific fields. We propose two indexes to measure the researcher's impact in a particular field based on citation counts to the author's most cited articles related to keywords. Design/methodology/approach We have considered two aspects: the representativeness of an author's most cited publications related to keywords and a simple mathematical form. Two variants were defined: Absolute Author's Impact index, which compares the research impact of a scientist with peers in a specific field and Relative Author's Impact index, which assesses the impact of an author's most cited works relative to the total contributions. Findings We evaluate the indexes for the case study of Quantum Information. Three keywords were considered. The results applying our indices were different from the application of conventional ones such as the h-index. The analysis of the case study suggests that combining both indices provides detailed assessment of scholar influence. Research limitations Only publications encompassed in the Science Citation Index were considered. The number of selected articles was three; it would be convenient to explore the behavior for 5–10 articles. We have not considered differences between subscription-based articles and Open Access ones. Practical implications This proposal aligns with trends favoring evaluation based on representative works rather than simple metrics. These indexes offer a solution for evaluating interdisciplinary researchers and identifying key contributors in specific fields, addressing limitations of conventional and alternatives metrics. Originality/value The proposal enhances existing tools to evaluate scientist including novel methodologies.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Data and Information Science
Published
2026-04-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1515/jdis-2025-0247
Primary Topic
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Impact Indicators of Scholars Related to Research Topics

Haichen Zhou, Biao Zhang, Jorge Félix Martínez Pazos, Jorge Gulín-González et al.
Journal of Data and Information Science
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
article

Impact Indicators of Scholars Related to Research Topics

Haichen Zhou, Biao Zhang, Jorge Félix Martínez Pazos, Jorge Gulín-González, Yunwei Chen
article en

Abstract

Abstract Purpose Scientometric indicators provide a more comprehensive assessment of scientists and organizations. Conventional (e.g. the h-index) and alternative indexes are available to carry out these evaluations. Despite their advantages these indexes do not differentiate articles published by an author in different fields of research and they do not facilitate identification of the impact of an author's most cited articles in specific fields. We propose two indexes to measure the researcher's impact in a particular field based on citation counts to the author's most cited articles related to keywords. Design/methodology/approach We have considered two aspects: the representativeness of an author's most cited publications related to keywords and a simple mathematical form. Two variants were defined: Absolute Author's Impact index, which compares the research impact of a scientist with peers in a specific field and Relative Author's Impact index, which assesses the impact of an author's most cited works relative to the total contributions. Findings We evaluate the indexes for the case study of Quantum Information. Three keywords were considered. The results applying our indices were different from the application of conventional ones such as the h-index. The analysis of the case study suggests that combining both indices provides detailed assessment of scholar influence. Research limitations Only publications encompassed in the Science Citation Index were considered. The number of selected articles was three; it would be convenient to explore the behavior for 5–10 articles. We have not considered differences between subscription-based articles and Open Access ones. Practical implications This proposal aligns with trends favoring evaluation based on representative works rather than simple metrics. These indexes offer a solution for evaluating interdisciplinary researchers and identifying key contributors in specific fields, addressing limitations of conventional and alternatives metrics. Originality/value The proposal enhances existing tools to evaluate scientist including novel methodologies.

Journal of Data and Information Science
University of Information Science (CU), National Science Library (CN)
West Light Foundation of the Chinese Academy of Sciences
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.