Calculating my H Index With Free Available Tools


In a conversation this week I was asked what my H-Index was. It is regarded as a measure of the impact of the published work of a scientist and after 20 years of publishing I am interested in how the work I have been doing for the past two decades is received.

I’m not going to discuss in detail some of the views of the H-Index measure as this has already been done on a number of blogs (1,2 and 3). Rather, I am going to see what freely available tools I can use to compute my H-Index.┬áThere are numerous ways to generate the H-index including the Google Scholar Universal Gadget, the Publish or Perish desktop software and the Scholar H-index Calculator.

Using each one at a time…

The Scholar Gadget

1) The Google Scholar Universal Gadget is EASY to use. I inserted my name as shown below and was given the statistics shown. I have over 100 peer-reviewed publications listed in my CV so 55 is pretty low. Clicking on the “view publications” gave me 83 listed in the Google Scholar search. Certainly not all of my publications are listed. The highest number of citations is 48 for a paper I was involved with at Kodak but there are a number of fairly well cited papers.

2) The Publish or Perish software was downloaded and installed in a couple of minutes. It was fairly obviious how to use it and within a few minutes I had pruned the retrieved hit list of articles down to those I had authored or co-authored. The resulting statistics are shown below. In this case I am associated with 65 papers giving an H-index of 15 and published over 22 years. Many of my papers are missing but the H-index is similar to that determined by the Google gadget. The various other statistics are not something I understand yet but will be looking into. While the Publish or Perish is very powerful (especially the formats it will allow me to save the stats out are very flexible and complete) it is probably a little too much for someone just looking for a “number”.

Publish or Perish Desktop Software

3) The Scholar H-index Calculator is an Add-on for Firefox from Agelin Bee. This add-on utilizes the Google API in the same way that the Google Gadget does but offers the ability to prune the data through an advanced interface integrated to Firefox. This approach ultimately gave the same H-index of 16 from the other gadget, not unexpected since it is using the Google API, and uses 83 publications, even after pruning. Overall this was my PREFERRED tool for finding an H-index value. Is it correct? I don’t know. But three tools seem very consistent yet don’t seem to be retrieving all of my publications…and one would assume those they can’t find might not be highly cited!

The Firefox Google Scholar Add-in

Just_out_of interest, the list of living chemists with an H-index>50 is pretty long. I have not worked in academia since 1990 when I worked at the University of Ottawa as their NMR Facility Manager. I am fortunate to have continued a scientific career enabling me to publish “after hours” and I don’t foresee me hitting the “50s” anytime soon! I am interested to know how the H-index generated with free online tools compares with commercial tools. I also hope to do some examination of the contribution of “old” articles to the H-index as there are a number of articles from early in my career that seem to have 0 citations and I know they were cited. It appears that many of the more recent articles have citations though. So, I wonder whether the presence of an article in the digital work is contributing some form of bias? This is just perception at present….

  1. #1 by sean ekins on April 26, 2011 - 3:30 pm

    A fascinating summary of free tools for calculating the h-factor – the challenge using the proprietary Web of Science is with the number of people sharing the same name and initials and trying to filter for this. So if you were trying to look up all the papers associated by using AJ Williams it would be around 1000. If you had no idea whether AJ Williams was a chemist or biologist then filtering by topic would not help you either. Stringently filtering for your name and initials and what I understand are your areas of research (and obviously omitting most of your papers) I come up with 31 papers since 1991, 437 citations and an h-factor = 13…which is not so far off your value with the other methods. So perhaps when people report the h-factor they should specify source software and date of calculation – “accessed on” etc..Worth checking out http://sci2s.ugr.es/hindex/ for descriptions on all the citation indices.

  2. #2 by tony on April 26, 2011 - 7:20 pm

    Thanks for the comments Sean. Definitely the 31 papers is way lower than what I’ve published. There aren’t many Antony J. Williams as chemists but there is a biologist and an electronics person also. Does this mean that online free tools are possibly giving a more accurate H-index. It might be worth getting your own using Web of Science and then I will get it using the public domain tools and we can see how they compare!

  3. #3 by Jordi Mestres on April 27, 2011 - 3:46 am

    Tony, an alternative way of doing it is through ResearcherID.com, with the added value
    that you have manually curated all articles that should be included in the calculation
    of your H-index directly from WoS and it is synchronised weekly with its contents. It
    is free, but it requires access to WoS to i) curate your list of articles and ii) keep
    on updating that list. You just need to generate a ResearcherID.

    • #4 by tony on April 27, 2011 - 9:05 pm

      Great advice Jordi…you can see the results below. Looks like we have an observed correlation between public tools and WoS…

  4. #5 by sean ekins on April 27, 2011 - 8:42 pm

    Tony from your Researcher ID link in your email

    Total Articles in Publication List: 121
    Articles With Citation Data: 60
    Sum of the Times Cited: 650
    Average Citations per Article: 10.83
    h-index: 15
    Last Updated: 04/28/2011 01:36 GMT

    Seems like all these methods are homing in on a number.

    • #6 by tony on April 27, 2011 - 9:04 pm

      Well that’s VERY interesting that the freely available tools give the “same” number, give or take. Of course, my H-index is only one data point …I’d be interested to know whether the public tools and commercial tools give the same number for you!

    • #7 by tony on April 27, 2011 - 9:22 pm

      Sean..just read your blog post on your own H-Index (http://tinyurl.com/5tchmz3)….I agree…I don’t obsess over it either..I didn’t even know mine until this past week and until someone prompted my interest by asking me what it was :-)

  5. #8 by John on September 25, 2011 - 6:47 am

    There is now a new free online version for the h-index calculator based on Google Scholar at this address: http://www.via-academy.org/online_scholar_h-index_calculator_h-if_anvur_parameters.aspx

  6. #9 by Francois C Berthoux on November 22, 2011 - 3:36 am

    I am interesting to get my h index calculated.
    Thanks

  7. #10 by Francois C Berthoux on November 22, 2011 - 3:38 am

    I am medical doctor in the field of Nephrology since 1970; I mostly published in the field of clinical science.

  8. #11 by Shad Saleem Faruqi on July 28, 2012 - 11:01 pm

    Would like to know my hirsch index citations

  9. #12 by n.rajendiran on September 18, 2012 - 9:39 am

    I am interesting to get my h index calculated. Would like to know my hirsch index citations

    my Total Articles in Publication List: 55
    Sum of the Times Cited: 480

  10. #13 by n.rajendiran on September 18, 2012 - 9:41 am

    Would like to know my hirsch index citations

  11. #14 by mark on September 27, 2012 - 12:39 pm

    My index on WOS is 23. Google scholar is 27. Both after cleaning up to include valid paers that I authored.

  12. #15 by mark on September 27, 2012 - 12:41 pm

    I am a biologist…

  13. #16 by Adam on October 20, 2012 - 3:11 pm

    Very informative article. H-index is a very nice measure, but it is as good as the data you put in to calculate it. A lot of flaws exist in terms of gathering the correct information and mapping a given publication to the author, and counting the number of citations. Depending on which source is used, H-index will vary by a lot. I like the c-index on cestagi, as it is evaluated from the data you put in (CV based), errors and flaws associated with data input are not present, plus it is much more diverse in my opinion (not just publication based).

  14. #17 by Deepak Prasad Subedi on November 28, 2012 - 4:25 am

    Very interesting and useful article. I used the first and second methods to calculate my h index and found the following results.
    Google Scholar gadget :Publish or perish
    citations 117 :74
    cited papers 24 :28
    h-index 6: 5
    I think there is quite good agreement in the h index calculated from the two methods.

  15. #18 by Rabha W Ibrahim on March 13, 2013 - 11:01 pm

    Pleace can you tell me why my h-index =0 and I have more than 100 citations?

  16. #19 by Scholarometer Team on February 11, 2014 - 8:13 pm

    Also consider Scholarometer (http://scholarometer.indiana.edu). It is a free browser extension for Chrome and Firefox, and also computer the universal h_s index and %ile, mentioned recently in Nature.

  17. #20 by Rabha W Ibrahim on August 22, 2014 - 5:59 am

    I couldn’t find my H-index.

(will not be published)