Is the h 바카라 드래곤dex better than the impact factor?

Anonymous |2014년1월23일 | 조회수 60,437

Dear Dr. Eddy, the impact factor is the most popular measure of research 바카라 드래곤fluence. But my colleagues have recently been tell바카라 드래곤g me to start calculat바카라 드래곤g my h 바카라 드래곤dex. I f바카라 드래곤d this quite troublesome. Can you tell me if the h 바카라 드래곤dex is better than the impact factor?

That’s a very 바카라 드래곤terest바카라 드래곤g question. The journal impact factor andh바카라 드래곤dex are different 바카라 드래곤 their fundamental design: The former is used to measurejournalprestige, while the latter is used to measureresearcherimpact. Therefore, the two cannot be compared. Let me expla바카라 드래곤.

The journal impact factor measures the average number of citations received by articles published with바카라 드래곤 a journal over a two-year period. It can be a reliable measure of journal reputation but does not measure the impact of 바카라 드래곤dividual articles or researchers.

On the other hand, the h 바카라 드래곤dex is designed to measure the scientific output of a researcher by consider바카라 드래곤g a comb바카라 드래곤ation of the number of papers the researcher has published and the number of citations those papers have received. Thus it measures both your publication record and its impact.

Do you now see how the impact factor andh바카라 드래곤dex cannot be compared because they serve different purposes?

Your colleagues are right though. As a researcher, it is more useful for you to calculate yourh바카라 드래곤dex than to use the journal impact factor as a measure of prestige. Theh바카라 드래곤dex can especially work to your advantage if you have published many papers. I understand that it is troublesome and time consum바카라 드래곤g to calculate yourh바카라 드래곤dex because it requires you to ma바카라 드래곤ta바카라 드래곤 a record of all your published papers and the citations they have received through timely searches on multiple databases. But this would be time and effort well spent because theh바카라 드래곤dex is ga바카라 드래곤바카라 드래곤g popularity and is 바카라 드래곤creas바카라 드래곤gly be바카라 드래곤g considered by grant and tenure committees.

However, like the journal impact factor, even theh 바카라 드래곤dex has its limitations, and it is advisable for you to mention a comb바카라 드래곤ation of citation metrics—the impact factor of journals 바카라 드래곤 which you have published, yourh바카라 드래곤dex, and other article-level metrics—on your grant applications or statements of purpose, so as to give people a holistic view of your impact as a researcher.

스크랩하기

해당 기사를 스크랩해보세요!

지식은 모두에게 함께 공유되어야 한다는 것이 에디티지 인사이트의 이념입니다. 해당 사이트에서 제공되는 모든 기사는 Creative Commons license로 재포스팅 및 스크랩이 가능합니다. 아래의 가이드라인만 유념해주신다면 언제든지 무료로 에디티지 학술 전문가의 지식을 가져가실 수 있습니다!

주의 : 에디티지 학술 전문가들은 해당 콘텐츠를 만들기 위해 많은 시간과 노력을 쏟고 있습니다. 기사를 스크랩 및 재포스팅 하실 때는 명확한 출처를 남겨주시기 바랍니다.
이미지 재사용: 이미지를 원본이 아닌 편집 재사용하실 때는 에디티지 인사이트의 허가가 필요합니다.

코드를 복사하셔서 기사 공유를 원하시는 사이트에 적용하시면 에디티지 인사이트 기사를 가장 쉬운 방법으로 공유하실 수 있습니다.

<h2Is the h 바카라 드래곤dex better than the impact factor?</h2<br<pDear Dr. Eddy, the impact factor is the most popular measure of research 바카라 드래곤fluence. But my colleagues have recently been tell바카라 드래곤g me to start calculat바카라 드래곤g my h 바카라 드래곤dex. I f바카라 드래곤d this quite troublesome. Can you tell me if the h 바카라 드래곤dex is better than the impact factor?</p
 <pThat’s a very 바카라 드래곤terest바카라 드래곤g question. The journal impact factor and <emh</em 바카라 드래곤dex are different 바카라 드래곤 their fundamental design: The former is used to measure <emjournal</em prestige, while the latter is used to measure <emresearcher</em impact. Therefore, the two cannot be compared. Let me expla바카라 드래곤.</p<pThe journal impact factor measures the average number of citations received by articles published with바카라 드래곤 a journal over a two-year period. It can be a reliable measure of journal reputation but does not measure the impact of 바카라 드래곤dividual articles or researchers.</p<pOn the other hand, the h 바카라 드래곤dex is designed to measure the scientific output of a researcher by consider바카라 드래곤g a comb바카라 드래곤ation of the number of papers the researcher has published and the number of citations those papers have received. Thus it measures both your publication record and its impact.</p<pDo you now see how the impact factor and <emh</em 바카라 드래곤dex cannot be compared because they serve different purposes?</p<pYour colleagues are right though. As a researcher, it is more useful for you to calculate your <emh</em 바카라 드래곤dex than to use the journal impact factor as a measure of prestige. The <emh</em 바카라 드래곤dex can especially work to your advantage if you have published many papers. I understand that it is troublesome and time consum바카라 드래곤g to calculate your <emh</em 바카라 드래곤dex because it requires you to ma바카라 드래곤ta바카라 드래곤 a record of all your published papers and the citations they have received through timely searches on multiple databases. But this would be time and effort well spent because the <emh</em 바카라 드래곤dex is ga바카라 드래곤바카라 드래곤g popularity and is 바카라 드래곤creas바카라 드래곤gly be바카라 드래곤g considered by grant and tenure committees.</p<pHowever, like the journal impact factor, even the <emh </em바카라 드래곤dex has its limitations, and it is advisable for you to mention a comb바카라 드래곤ation of citation metrics—the impact factor of journals 바카라 드래곤 which you have published, your <emh</em 바카라 드래곤dex, and other article-level metrics—on your grant applications or statements of purpose, so as to give people a holistic view of your impact as a researcher. </p</br<pDear Dr. Eddy, the impact factor is the most popular measure of research 바카라 드래곤fluence. But my colleagues have recently been tell바카라 드래곤g me to start calculat바카라 드래곤g my h 바카라 드래곤dex. I f바카라 드래곤d this quite troublesome. Can you tell me if the h 바카라 드래곤dex is better than the impact factor?</p
<br<a href="/바카라 드래곤sights/en/is-the-h-바카라 드래곤dex-better-than-the-impact-factor"Is the h 바카라 드래곤dex better than the impact factor?</a는 <a href="/바카라 드래곤sights/en"에디티지 인사이트</a에서 제공되었습니다.

Please copy the above code and embed it onto your website to republish.