1. Crediting multi-authored papers to single authors
- Author
-
Philip Hofmann, Anna Tietze, Serge Galam, Aarhus University [Aarhus], Centre de recherches politiques de Sciences Po (Sciences Po, CNRS) (CEVIPOF), Sciences Po (Sciences Po)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Interdisciplinary Nanoscience Center (iNANO), and Centre de recherches politiques de Sciences Po (CEVIPOF)
- Subjects
FOS: Computer and information sciences ,Statistics and Probability ,Credit assignment ,Physics - Physics and Society ,Property (philosophy) ,Index (economics) ,Computer science ,FOS: Physical sciences ,Physics and Society (physics.soc-ph) ,01 natural sciences ,010305 fluids & plasmas ,[SHS.DROIT]Humanities and Social Sciences/Law ,Order (exchange) ,0103 physical sciences ,Digital Libraries (cs.DL) ,Early career ,010306 general physics ,Computer Science - Digital Libraries ,Scientometrics ,Condensed Matter Physics ,Test (assessment) ,Single authors ,Value (economics) ,Papers ,Mathematical economics - Abstract
A fair assignment of credit for multi-authored publications is a long-standing issue in scientometrics. In the calculation of the $h$-index, for instance, all co-authors receive equal credit for a given publication, independent of a given author's contribution to the work or of the total number of co-authors. Several attempts have been made to distribute the credit in a more appropriate manner. In a recent paper, Hirsch has suggested a new way of credit assignment that is fundamentally different from the previous ones: All credit for a multi-author paper goes to a single author, the called ``$\alpha$-author'', defined as the person with the highest current $h$-index not the highest $h$-index at the time of the paper's publication) (J. E. Hirsch, Scientometrics 118, 673 (2019)). The collection of papers this author has received credit for as $\alpha$-author is then used to calculate a new index, $h_{\alpha}$, following the same recipe as for the usual $h$ index. The objective of this new assignment is not a fairer distribution of credit, but rather the determination of an altogether different property, the degree of a person's scientific leadership. We show that given the complex time dependence of $h$ for individual scientists, the approach of using the current $h$ value instead of the historic one is problematic, and we argue that it would be feasible to determine the $\alpha$-author at the time of the paper's publication instead. On the other hand, there are other practical considerations that make the calculation of the proposed $h_{\alpha}$ very difficult. As an alternative, we explore other ways of crediting papers to a single author in order to test early career achievement or scientific leadership., Comment: 6 pages, 4 figures
- Published
- 2020