Popular in Social Sciences

Books

City Time: On Being Sentenced to Rikers Island

Independent Scholar David A. Campbell

Culture and Society

The City as a Growth Machine: Toward a Political Economy of Place

New York University Harvey Moltoch

Economics

Gender and Economics

University of California Santa Barbara Shelly Lundberg

American Politics

Keeping the Republic

Boston College Marc Landy

Banks and Policy Organisations

Greening the financial sector

European Investment Bank Matteo Ferrazzi

British Politics

Entrepreneurial thinking: the politics and practice of policy impact

University of Sheffield Matthew Flinders

Culture and Society

Carceral Entrapments: Views from the Prison/Street Interface in India

Indian Institute of Technology Delhi Mahuya Bandyopadhya

Citations and Incentives in Academic Contests

View more insights in Social Sciences - Economics

View more figures from University of Guelph

View the page of J. Atsu Amegashie

Read the Study

J. Atsu Amegashie discusses a contest between scholars on the basis of three popular indices of citation.

Image courtesy of interviewee. February 9, 2024

Generating Workspace

Export as PDF

This video video explains the concept of citations, which refer to the references made to published works. Citations are essential for assessing the significance of a scholar's work, often influencing promotions, salaries, and university rankings. The importance of a citation is likened to the popularity of a piece of music being downloaded.

The discussion includes various methods for measuring citations, notably the H-index and I10-index, both of which aim to evaluate the impact or quality of a scholar's work. The H-index reflects the number of papers by a scholar that have received at least a certain number of citations, while the I10-index counts the number of articles with at least 10 citations.

This video video critiques the H-index for potentially underrepresenting scholars whose work may be highly cited but has fewer papers. It notes the significance of the quality of journals where papers are published, exemplified by the impact factor, which influences citation rates.

Furthermore, the text addresses unethical practices such as citation cartels, where scholars fraudulently inflate citation counts by citing each other. The overall assertion is that while the total citation count may focus on breadth, when combined with journal quality, it provides a more balanced assessment of scholarly impact, equally considering depth.

Language:

Export as PDF

X-TIMESTAMP-MAP:LOCAL=00:00:00.000,MPEGTS=900000

00:00.385 --> 00:03.755
A citation is a reference to a published

00:04.585 --> 00:06.035
work or published work.

00:07.645 --> 00:09.745
So if somebody cites your work,

00:09.815 --> 00:11.065
then, then that is a citation.

00:11.205 --> 00:12.585
So if I write a, an article

00:13.795 --> 00:16.935
and if somebody cites it, that's one citation.

00:18.525 --> 00:22.965
Now they are used to determine the importance

00:22.965 --> 00:24.725
of a person's work, because if you do work

00:24.785 --> 00:28.405
and people are citing you, then it shows

00:28.405 --> 00:29.525
how important the work is.

00:29.675 --> 00:30.885
It's just like music.

00:31.665 --> 00:36.045
If you have a piece of music and people are downloading it

00:36.045 --> 00:39.355
and playing it, it is, shows how important

00:40.175 --> 00:41.395
the piece of work is.

00:42.215 --> 00:46.735
So citations are used for promotions,

00:46.755 --> 00:49.875
for salaries, for getting prices.

00:49.905 --> 00:53.775
Like the Nobel Prize, they're used for ranking universities.

00:54.035 --> 00:55.655
So it's if Harvard or Oxford,

00:56.355 --> 01:01.235
or maybe Hebrew University or university in South America

01:01.375 --> 01:04.475
or somewhere else, if the arts professors

01:04.855 --> 01:06.675
or lecturers are being cited, often

01:07.345 --> 01:09.275
that raises the prestige of university.

01:10.275 --> 01:13.385
Even in law, even in law justices,

01:13.955 --> 01:16.945
there is a famous British judge called Lord Denny,

01:18.205 --> 01:21.855
and his legal opinions are highly cited,

01:22.115 --> 01:24.895
and that made, that made him popular as a scholar.

01:24.895 --> 01:28.495
People cite the, if the lawyers talk, they cite Lord,

01:28.605 --> 01:31.255
Lord Denning, especially in the, in the, in, in the British

01:31.785 --> 01:33.255
Australian Commonwealth system.

01:33.255 --> 01:35.155
They cite him a lot. Um,

01:36.445 --> 01:38.275
there are justice in the US like Justice,

01:39.055 --> 01:42.155
the Legisl Anon Scalia, who was the Supreme Court,

01:43.365 --> 01:48.205
his legal opinions were cited,

01:48.505 --> 01:49.605
and that made him popular.

01:49.945 --> 01:51.005
You know, somebody writes,

01:51.535 --> 01:55.155
let's say 10 papers and paper.

01:55.215 --> 01:57.595
One is cited seven times paper,

01:57.655 --> 02:00.915
two cited eight times paper three is cited

02:01.555 --> 02:02.875
a thousand times and so forth.

02:03.775 --> 02:07.035
So what a citation index does is how do I aggregate,

02:07.495 --> 02:12.075
how do I summarize the citations of all these 10 papers?

02:13.305 --> 02:16.725
And so people have developed, different techniques.

02:17.735 --> 02:20.515
Uh, so one thing that people worry about is they look at

02:20.515 --> 02:23.995
breadth of a, of a scholar and the depth of a, of a scholar.

02:24.495 --> 02:27.915
So the breadth of a scholar's breadth is the number

02:27.915 --> 02:30.555
of papers that he writes, or he or she writes.

02:32.125 --> 02:36.695
And the depth is how the quality of each paper

02:36.695 --> 02:37.855
that the person's writes.

02:38.235 --> 02:41.055
So, so there's so, so somebody may write lots of papers.

02:41.595 --> 02:45.965
So they have breadth, but the papers are not really cited.

02:46.305 --> 02:49.795
So they don't have depth. Somebody may write few papers,

02:50.765 --> 02:52.585
so they don't have a lot, a whole range,

02:53.005 --> 02:54.825
but each paper is cited a lot.

02:55.495 --> 02:57.475
So now how do you measure these things?

02:57.535 --> 02:58.835
If I have, if I have two

02:58.870 --> 03:00.725
Scholars, one has only one paper

03:01.575 --> 03:04.365
that is cited a thousand times.

03:04.985 --> 03:07.765
So that's a high quality word. It has, it has a huge impact.

03:08.665 --> 03:10.125
And then the other has 10 papers.

03:11.155 --> 03:13.795
Each is cited a hundred times.

03:14.905 --> 03:18.245
So both of them have a, have 2000 citations of thousand,

03:19.145 --> 03:21.645
but one is spread over 10 papers.

03:22.675 --> 03:26.135
And for that scholar, it's, it's, it's only for,

03:26.275 --> 03:28.435
one paper sometimes.

03:28.455 --> 03:31.635
So, so, so here we're measuring breadth

03:32.575 --> 03:33.795
by the number of papers you write.

03:35.475 --> 03:37.365
There's people who also measure breadth

03:37.785 --> 03:39.405
by the different topics you write.

03:39.465 --> 03:40.845
So somebody can write 10 papers,

03:40.945 --> 03:41.965
but they're on the same topic.

03:42.525 --> 03:44.685
Somebody will say, that person doesn't have breath.

03:45.265 --> 03:47.125
But I don't consider that actually.

03:47.625 --> 03:52.285
So one citation index is the total citation count.

03:52.835 --> 03:56.805
That one only counts the total number of citations

03:57.225 --> 03:59.685
to all the papers that the, the scholar has written.

04:00.585 --> 04:03.565
So it just, it doesn't look at, debt.

04:03.705 --> 04:04.725
It just looks at breadth.

04:05.185 --> 04:07.325
You've written, you've written, you've written 10

04:07.325 --> 04:08.365
papers in total.

04:09.155 --> 04:10.965
They have thousand citations.

04:11.025 --> 04:13.045
And so your citations count is a thousand.

04:14.395 --> 04:16.415
The each index that is, that was involved

04:16.415 --> 04:19.895
by a physicist tries to track a balance between depth

04:20.635 --> 04:24.895
and, depth, depth and,

04:24.915 --> 04:26.135
and, and, and breadth.

04:26.475 --> 04:30.475
So the H index is the nu is the number of papers each

04:30.655 --> 04:32.925
of a scholar that each have

04:34.995 --> 04:36.415
at least h citations.

04:37.195 --> 04:41.175
So if a, if a scholar has a citation of 10,

04:42.225 --> 04:44.765
it means that a scholar has written 10 papers

04:45.425 --> 04:49.705
and each of them have 10, at least 10 citations.

04:50.435 --> 04:52.455
So if a scholar, like the example I gave,

04:52.635 --> 04:54.655
if a scholar has 10 papers

04:55.515 --> 05:00.105
and each of them has hundred citations, that's eight.

05:00.155 --> 05:01.265
Index it 10.

05:02.375 --> 05:04.675
So I, so I discussed the, the disadvantage of the,

05:04.675 --> 05:05.795
of the H index later,

05:06.295 --> 05:08.915
and there is now an index called the I 10 index,

05:09.925 --> 05:11.235
which was developed by Google.

05:12.595 --> 05:17.555
The I 10 index is the number of articles by

05:18.235 --> 05:21.595
scholar that have received at least 10 citations.

05:22.325 --> 05:25.465
So when you have, when you have, 25,

05:25.495 --> 05:26.825
when you have 50 papers

05:27.565 --> 05:32.345
and 25 of them have at least 10 citations, the I 10 index

05:33.645 --> 05:34.855
will be 25.

05:35.355 --> 05:38.375
You have one paper that has a thousand citations,

05:38.435 --> 05:39.615
and they don't have any other people.

05:40.195 --> 05:43.655
The h the H index will penalize you your

05:44.375 --> 05:46.495
citation index H index is one.

05:48.015 --> 05:49.185
Okay? And so it doesn't,

05:49.185 --> 05:51.385
so h the H index will waste citations.

05:51.385 --> 05:53.745
Like I just Googled. There's an economist

05:53.745 --> 05:56.935
that MIT put semi glue. He

05:57.035 --> 06:01.175
Has total citations of more of two 31,000,

06:02.505 --> 06:05.005
but his H index is only 68.

06:06.425 --> 06:10.675
So the will waste his, his citation.

06:10.775 --> 06:13.315
So let, lemme give, go back to that example what I said.

06:13.575 --> 06:17.855
If you have 10, papers, each

06:17.855 --> 06:22.055
with a thousand citations, your H index is 10.

06:23.555 --> 06:27.375
So the excess, all those thousand citations, don't, don't,

06:27.375 --> 06:28.455
don't, don't, don't, don't matter.

06:29.335 --> 06:31.745
Okay? So the H index, waste citations.

06:32.245 --> 06:34.105
So the h this shortcut of the H index

06:35.385 --> 06:37.955
will not be a problem if you're in a field.

06:37.955 --> 06:40.835
People have found out, if you're in a field like,

06:40.835 --> 06:44.515
physics where people write a lot of papers,

06:45.415 --> 06:47.835
but also have the papers are highly cited,

06:48.815 --> 06:50.355
or you are in a field like mathematics

06:50.645 --> 06:52.675
where people don't write a lot of papers and,

06:52.695 --> 06:54.115
and papers are not cited too much.

06:54.625 --> 06:57.975
That is if you're in a field where the number of papers

06:58.905 --> 07:00.765
and the number of citations move together.

07:00.825 --> 07:03.045
If, if they're, if they're correlated positively,

07:03.515 --> 07:05.605
then the H index may not be a handicap.

07:06.915 --> 07:10.375
But in, I feel like economics where people don't write a lot

07:10.375 --> 07:12.295
of papers, but they write highly cited papers,

07:12.805 --> 07:14.455
then the H index becomes a problem.

07:15.385 --> 07:19.215
So, what, what,

07:19.315 --> 07:20.455
so the other citation index

07:20.455 --> 07:22.655
that I've discussed is the total citation index.

07:22.655 --> 07:24.615
That one takes your total number of citations,

07:24.615 --> 07:26.215
doesn't look at the number of papers you've written,

07:26.435 --> 07:29.095
it just says these are your total number of, of citations

07:29.315 --> 07:30.535
for all the papers you've written.

07:31.155 --> 07:35.165
So people say that that has

07:36.485 --> 07:38.285
a disadvantage because doesn't look at depth,

07:38.345 --> 07:41.525
it doesn't look at the number of times each paper is cited.

07:41.525 --> 07:44.085
It just looks at all the citations for the, for the papers.

07:44.625 --> 07:46.605
But like I discussed in that, in, in, in my paper,

07:47.595 --> 07:49.615
in reality, that's what what scholars do.

07:49.835 --> 07:52.335
We look at, we look at the total citations,

07:52.995 --> 07:54.175
but we also look at the quality

07:54.235 --> 07:57.335
of journals in which the citations appear.

07:58.075 --> 08:00.895
So when you combine the quality of the journal

08:01.915 --> 08:04.135
and the total citation index,

08:04.325 --> 08:05.775
it's gonna dominate the H index

08:05.775 --> 08:09.955
because the H index has this undesirable property

08:09.955 --> 08:14.195
where the number of papers you write is a cap

08:14.735 --> 08:16.875
on the, on, on, on your number of citations.

08:16.935 --> 08:21.275
So the h the, because the, the, the, the H index it with

08:22.535 --> 08:23.655
citations, you can, you can get

08:23.755 --> 08:26.055
so many citations, but it don't count.

08:26.115 --> 08:28.295
So look at the number of papers you are writing are not,

08:28.635 --> 08:31.375
are not keeping up with the, which you are being cited.

08:32.235 --> 08:36.095
So overall, if you compare, if you take, if you combine

08:36.675 --> 08:37.895
the total citation index

08:38.395 --> 08:39.855
and the quality of journals, which is

08:39.855 --> 08:41.335
what we actually do in in academia,

08:41.395 --> 08:43.775
we just don't look at your number of citations.

08:43.775 --> 08:45.855
We also look at the quality of journals in which those

08:46.055 --> 08:47.375
citations appear, or the,

08:47.375 --> 08:49.175
or the quality of journals in which we've published.

08:49.685 --> 08:54.095
Then the total citations count will dominate the H index.

08:54.715 --> 08:57.125
The quality of journals is usually measured by

08:57.125 --> 08:58.485
what is called the impact factor.

08:59.465 --> 09:03.125
And the impact factor is the average number of citations

09:03.785 --> 09:05.525
to papers published in

09:05.525 --> 09:07.405
that journal over a certain period of time.

09:08.345 --> 09:13.195
Okay? And what has been found is that even journals with

09:13.815 --> 09:18.395
Im high empath factors are dominated by only a few papers.

09:18.775 --> 09:20.395
So there are papers

09:21.555 --> 09:24.005
that appear in high empath factor journals

09:24.005 --> 09:25.045
that don't get cited.

09:25.325 --> 09:27.205
Somebody did some work some years ago

09:27.665 --> 09:30.725
and found that the median paper in the AM

09:31.245 --> 09:33.735
American Economy Review, which is one

09:33.735 --> 09:37.385
of the top journal top five journals in economics, has

09:39.205 --> 09:41.175
zero citation, don't get cited.

09:41.795 --> 09:45.465
So this is a case where the prestige

09:45.525 --> 09:47.825
of the journal is driven by only

09:48.335 --> 09:49.745
very few highly cited papers

09:50.365 --> 09:53.985
or various heterogeneity in the number of papers

09:54.015 --> 09:58.145
that get ci, but still is a question of averages.

09:58.365 --> 10:01.465
On average, if you publish in a journal

10:02.295 --> 10:05.065
with a high impact factor, you are likely

10:05.325 --> 10:08.385
to be cited more than if you publish in a journal

10:08.385 --> 10:09.625
with a low impact factor.

10:10.415 --> 10:15.115
This is because journals with high EM impact factor factors

10:15.255 --> 10:17.275
or journals with high empath factors are

10:17.275 --> 10:18.315
high quality journals.

10:18.775 --> 10:21.395
So the referee process is more rigorous,

10:21.865 --> 10:22.995
they are more demanding.

10:23.415 --> 10:26.075
So the papers they end up publishing are high,

10:26.105 --> 10:27.275
tend to be high quality papers.

10:27.495 --> 10:29.155
So again, I'm talking in terms of averages.

10:29.155 --> 10:31.595
That's not, it doesn't mean that every paper that apply

10:31.705 --> 10:34.555
that appears in a high impact factor journal is a high

10:34.555 --> 10:36.495
quality paper or article.

10:36.715 --> 10:39.255
But in on average, the, the papers

10:39.255 --> 10:42.415
that appear in those journals are, are good.

10:42.915 --> 10:46.545
And in most disciplines, like in physics, economics,

10:46.695 --> 10:50.225
mathematics and all that, we agree on

10:50.225 --> 10:52.305
what the top journals are like in mathematics.

10:52.845 --> 10:55.185
The s of mathematics is considered

10:55.185 --> 10:57.905
to be a very good journal in economics.

10:58.405 --> 11:00.855
We have five top journals that are,

11:00.885 --> 11:02.575
that we agree are very good journals.

11:02.875 --> 11:06.615
So, so the quality of, so the quality of the journals,

11:06.715 --> 11:07.975
ma matter a lot.

11:08.515 --> 11:11.835
So I, somebody sent me an article

11:13.225 --> 11:16.045
yesterday and there's now something called

11:16.155 --> 11:18.125
what their friend was citation cartels.

11:18.795 --> 11:22.415
So these are people who fraudulently cite each other.

11:23.615 --> 11:25.515
So the, the, the, the article was about somebody

11:25.515 --> 11:28.155
who had done a study where they saw that there's,

11:28.155 --> 11:30.315
there are some universities in China

11:30.975 --> 11:34.505
and Saudi Arabia that all of a sudden in mathematics,

11:35.805 --> 11:38.465
their scholars are getting cited a lot.

11:39.135 --> 11:41.675
And it's because they form what are called citation cartels,

11:42.215 --> 11:44.525
where they publish in low quality

11:44.565 --> 11:46.685
journals and cite each other.

11:46.875 --> 11:49.365
They cite their colleagues to, to, to,

11:49.625 --> 11:52.965
to artificially inflict the, the citations. There's

11:53.005 --> 11:55.805
Something also called, citation pad,

11:56.295 --> 11:58.485
where you send an article to a journal

11:59.395 --> 12:01.295
and the reviewers insist

12:01.295 --> 12:02.615
that you have to cite certain papers.

12:03.125 --> 12:04.735
They put pressure into c certain papers,

12:05.195 --> 12:06.815
and those papers tend to be their own papers.

12:06.955 --> 12:10.215
So like, like you expect in anything that is competitive,

12:10.215 --> 12:13.625
people try to cheat and all and, and all that.

12:13.775 --> 12:16.585
Yeah. But the quality of the journal matters a lot.

12:17.165 --> 12:19.665
And, and we kind of agree on what, in most fields,

12:20.165 --> 12:21.825
we agree on what the good journals are.

12:22.165 --> 12:25.335
The field in which we use the index matters.

12:26.075 --> 12:30.615
So again, if you are in a field where,

12:30.955 --> 12:33.735
the, for example, if there are field where the number

12:33.735 --> 12:38.065
of papers and the number of citations are correlated,

12:38.085 --> 12:40.625
so in a field where people write a lot of papers

12:41.165 --> 12:44.455
and the papers tend to be cited, so they are correlated,

12:44.795 --> 12:47.535
or in a field where people don't write many papers like

12:47.535 --> 12:52.025
mathematics, and the papers are not cited that much here.

12:52.205 --> 12:54.065
The, the, the, the, the number of citations,

12:54.065 --> 12:55.185
the number of papers go together.

12:55.565 --> 12:59.305
If in that field kind of field, then maybe, then,

12:59.305 --> 13:03.545
then the H index will not be, will will, the shortcomings

13:03.545 --> 13:05.985
of the H index will not be too apparent.

13:06.085 --> 13:07.825
The, the H index may do a good job,

13:08.625 --> 13:13.005
but if in a field where the correlation between the number

13:13.005 --> 13:17.455
of papers you write and, and citations is weak, right?

13:17.475 --> 13:19.175
So that you end up in a, in a field

13:19.175 --> 13:20.735
where people don't write a lot of papers,

13:21.475 --> 13:23.175
but the papers are highly cited,

13:23.965 --> 13:27.695
then the H index will not be a good, index.

13:28.155 --> 13:31.815
But in general, no matter what, which field you are in,

13:32.835 --> 13:37.455
if you combine the total citation count with a quality

13:37.475 --> 13:41.255
of journals, that strikes a good balance between depth

13:41.435 --> 13:43.115
and breadth of work.

13:43.335 --> 13:47.475
And so in general, I would say that, the, the,

13:47.735 --> 13:48.755
the main message is

13:48.755 --> 13:51.755
that the total citations count gets a bad rap

13:52.295 --> 13:53.435
for not being a good in depth,

13:53.435 --> 13:55.555
because it doesn't, it's focused on breadth but not depth.

13:56.605 --> 13:59.385
But the reality is that is scholars,

13:59.385 --> 14:01.025
we just don't look at the total citations.

14:01.165 --> 14:03.825
We combine it with the College of journals that

14:04.345 --> 14:05.585
a scholar publishes a

14:05.845 --> 14:09.955
and if you combine those two, then it's okay.

14:10.105 --> 14:13.825
It's, it, it, it, it'll good, it'll give good incentives to

14:13.825 --> 14:14.785
to, to, to scholars.

00:00 - A citation is a reference to a published work or published work. So if somebody cites your work, then, then that is a citation. So if I write a, an article and if somebody cites it, that's one citation.

00:18 - Now they are used to determine the importance of a person's work, because if you do work and people are citing you, then it shows how important the work is. It's just like music. If you have a piece of music and people are downloading it and playing it, it is, shows how important the piece of work is. So citations are used for promotions, for salaries, for getting prices.

00:49 - Like the Nobel Prize, they're used for ranking universities. So it's if Harvard or Oxford, or maybe Hebrew University or university in South America or somewhere else, if the arts professors or lecturers are being cited, often that raises the prestige of university. Even in law, even in law justices, there is a famous British judge called Lord Denny, and his legal opinions are highly cited, and that made, that made him popular as a scholar.

01:24 - People cite the, if the lawyers talk, they cite Lord, Lord Denning, especially in the, in the, in, in the British Australian Commonwealth system. They cite him a lot. there are justice in the US like Justice, the Legisl Anon Scalia, who was the Supreme Court, his legal opinions were cited, and that made him popular. You know, somebody writes, let's say 10 papers and paper.

01:55 - One is cited seven times paper, two cited eight times paper three is cited a thousand times and so forth. So what a citation index does is how do I aggregate, how do I summarize the citations of all these 10 papers? And so people have developed, different techniques. so one thing that people worry about is they look at breadth of a, of a scholar and the depth of a, of a scholar. So the breadth of a scholar's breadth is the number of papers that he writes, or he or she writes.

02:32 - And the depth is how the quality of each paper that the person's writes. So, so there's so, so somebody may write lots of papers. So they have breadth, but the papers are not really cited. So they don't have depth. Somebody may write few papers, so they don't have a lot, a whole range, but each paper is cited a lot. So now how do you measure these things? If I have, if I have two Scholars, one has only one paper

03:01 - that is cited a thousand times. So that's a high quality word. It has, it has a huge impact. And then the other has 10 papers. Each is cited a hundred times. So both of them have a, have 2000 citations of thousand, but one is spread over 10 papers. And for that scholar, it's, it's, it's only for, one paper sometimes. So, so, so here we're measuring breadth by the number of papers you write.

03:35 - There's people who also measure breadth by the different topics you write. So somebody can write 10 papers, but they're on the same topic. Somebody will say, that person doesn't have breath. But I don't consider that actually. So one citation index is the total citation count. That one only counts the total number of citations to all the papers that the, the scholar has written. So it just, it doesn't look at, debt.

04:03 - It just looks at breadth. You've written, you've written, you've written 10 papers in total. They have thousand citations. And so your citations count is a thousand. The each index that is, that was involved by a physicist tries to track a balance between depth and, depth, depth and, and, and, and breadth. So the H index is the nu is the number of papers each

04:30 - of a scholar that each have at least h citations. So if a, if a scholar has a citation of 10, it means that a scholar has written 10 papers and each of them have 10, at least 10 citations. So if a scholar, like the example I gave, if a scholar has 10 papers and each of them has hundred citations, that's eight. Index it 10. So I, so I discussed the, the disadvantage of the,

05:04 - of the H index later, and there is now an index called the I 10 index, which was developed by Google. The I 10 index is the number of articles by scholar that have received at least 10 citations. So when you have, when you have, 25, when you have 50 papers and 25 of them have at least 10 citations, the I 10 index will be 25. You have one paper that has a thousand citations,

05:38 - and they don't have any other people. The h the H index will penalize you your citation index H index is one. Okay? And so it doesn't, so h the H index will waste citations. Like I just Googled. There's an economist that MIT put semi glue. He Has total citations of more of two 31,000, but his H index is only 68. So the will waste his, his citation.

06:10 - So let, lemme give, go back to that example what I said. If you have 10, papers, each with a thousand citations, your H index is 10. So the excess, all those thousand citations, don't, don't, don't, don't, don't, don't matter. Okay? So the H index, waste citations. So the h this shortcut of the H index will not be a problem if you're in a field. People have found out, if you're in a field like, physics where people write a lot of papers,

06:45 - but also have the papers are highly cited, or you are in a field like mathematics where people don't write a lot of papers and, and papers are not cited too much. That is if you're in a field where the number of papers and the number of citations move together. If, if they're, if they're correlated positively, then the H index may not be a handicap. But in, I feel like economics where people don't write a lot of papers, but they write highly cited papers,

07:12 - then the H index becomes a problem. So, what, what, so the other citation index that I've discussed is the total citation index. That one takes your total number of citations, doesn't look at the number of papers you've written, it just says these are your total number of, of citations for all the papers you've written. So people say that that has a disadvantage because doesn't look at depth,

07:38 - it doesn't look at the number of times each paper is cited. It just looks at all the citations for the, for the papers. But like I discussed in that, in, in, in my paper, in reality, that's what what scholars do. We look at, we look at the total citations, but we also look at the quality of journals in which the citations appear. So when you combine the quality of the journal and the total citation index, it's gonna dominate the H index

08:05 - because the H index has this undesirable property where the number of papers you write is a cap on the, on, on, on your number of citations. So the h the, because the, the, the, the H index it with citations, you can, you can get so many citations, but it don't count. So look at the number of papers you are writing are not, are not keeping up with the, which you are being cited. So overall, if you compare, if you take, if you combine the total citation index

08:38 - and the quality of journals, which is what we actually do in in academia, we just don't look at your number of citations. We also look at the quality of journals in which those citations appear, or the, or the quality of journals in which we've published. Then the total citations count will dominate the H index. The quality of journals is usually measured by what is called the impact factor. And the impact factor is the average number of citations

09:03 - to papers published in that journal over a certain period of time. Okay? And what has been found is that even journals with Im high empath factors are dominated by only a few papers. So there are papers that appear in high empath factor journals that don't get cited. Somebody did some work some years ago and found that the median paper in the AM American Economy Review, which is one

09:33 - of the top journal top five journals in economics, has zero citation, don't get cited. So this is a case where the prestige of the journal is driven by only very few highly cited papers or various heterogeneity in the number of papers that get ci, but still is a question of averages. On average, if you publish in a journal with a high impact factor, you are likely to be cited more than if you publish in a journal

10:08 - with a low impact factor. This is because journals with high EM impact factor factors or journals with high empath factors are high quality journals. So the referee process is more rigorous, they are more demanding. So the papers they end up publishing are high, tend to be high quality papers. So again, I'm talking in terms of averages. That's not, it doesn't mean that every paper that apply

10:31 - that appears in a high impact factor journal is a high quality paper or article. But in on average, the, the papers that appear in those journals are, are good. And in most disciplines, like in physics, economics, mathematics and all that, we agree on what the top journals are like in mathematics. The s of mathematics is considered to be a very good journal in economics. We have five top journals that are,

11:00 - that we agree are very good journals. So, so the quality of, so the quality of the journals, ma matter a lot. So I, somebody sent me an article yesterday and there's now something called what their friend was citation cartels. So these are people who fraudulently cite each other. So the, the, the, the article was about somebody who had done a study where they saw that there's, there are some universities in China

11:30 - and Saudi Arabia that all of a sudden in mathematics, their scholars are getting cited a lot. And it's because they form what are called citation cartels, where they publish in low quality journals and cite each other. They cite their colleagues to, to, to, to artificially inflict the, the citations. There's Something also called, citation pad, where you send an article to a journal and the reviewers insist

12:01 - that you have to cite certain papers. They put pressure into c certain papers, and those papers tend to be their own papers. So like, like you expect in anything that is competitive, people try to cheat and all and, and all that. Yeah. But the quality of the journal matters a lot. And, and we kind of agree on what, in most fields, we agree on what the good journals are. The field in which we use the index matters. So again, if you are in a field where,

12:30 - the, for example, if there are field where the number of papers and the number of citations are correlated, so in a field where people write a lot of papers and the papers tend to be cited, so they are correlated, or in a field where people don't write many papers like mathematics, and the papers are not cited that much here. The, the, the, the, the number of citations, the number of papers go together. If in that field kind of field, then maybe, then, then the H index will not be, will will, the shortcomings

13:03 - of the H index will not be too apparent. The, the H index may do a good job, but if in a field where the correlation between the number of papers you write and, and citations is weak, right? So that you end up in a, in a field where people don't write a lot of papers, but the papers are highly cited, then the H index will not be a good, index. But in general, no matter what, which field you are in, if you combine the total citation count with a quality

13:37 - of journals, that strikes a good balance between depth and breadth of work. And so in general, I would say that, the, the, the main message is that the total citations count gets a bad rap for not being a good in depth, because it doesn't, it's focused on breadth but not depth. But the reality is that is scholars, we just don't look at the total citations. We combine it with the College of journals that

14:04 - a scholar publishes a and if you combine those two, then it's okay. It's, it, it, it, it'll good, it'll give good incentives to to, to, to scholars.

Faculti AI can make mistakes