1.6 References

• Batista, P.D.; Campiteli, M.G.; Konouchi, O.; Martinez, A.S. (2006) Is it possible to compare researchers with different scientific interests? Scientometrics, 68(1): 179-189.
• Baylis, M., Gravenor, M .& Kao, R. (1999). Sprucing up ones impact factor. Nature, 401, 322.
• Bornmann, L.; Daniel, H-D. (2005) Does the h-index for ranking of scientists really work? Scientometrics, 65(3): 391-392.
• Bornmann, L.; Daniel, H-D. (2007) What do we know about the h index? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(9): 1181-1185.
• Cameron, B.D. (2005). Trends in the Usage of ISI Bibliometric Data, Uses, Abuses, and Implication. Portal: Libraries and the Academy. 5: 105-125.
• Cronin, B.; Meho, L. (2006) Using the h-Index to Rank Influential Information Scientists, Journal of the American Association for Information Science and Technology, 57(9): 1275-1278.
• Egghe, L.; Rousseau R. (2006) An informetric model for the Hirsch-index, Scientometrics, 69(1): 121-129.
• Egghe, L. (2006) Theory and practice of the g-index, Scientometrics, 69(1): 131-152.
• Glänzel, W. (2006) On the opportunities and limitations of the H-index, Science Focus, vol. 1 (1): 10-11.
• Gowrishankar J. & Divakar, P. (1999). Sprucing up ones impact factor. Nature, 401, 321-322.
• Harzing, A.W.K. & Wal, R. van der (2008). Google Scholar as a new source for citation analysis?, Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 8(1): 62-71, published online January 8, http://www.int-res.com/articles/esep2008/8/e008pp5.pdf.
• Hirsch, J.E. (2005) An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output, arXiv:physics/0508025 v5 29 Sep 2006.
• Iglesias, J.E, Pecharromán, C. (2006) Scaling the h-Index for Different Scientific ISI Fields, arXiv:physics/0607224
• Leydesdorff, L. (2008) Caveats for the use of citation indicators in research and journal evaluations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59: 278-287.
• McGarty, C. (2000). The citation impact factor in social psychology: a bad statistic that encourages bad science. Current Research in Social Psychology, 5: 1-16.
• Podlubny, I. (2005) Comparison of scientific impact expressed by the number of citations in different fields of science, Scientometrics, 64(1): pp. 95-99.
• Podlubny, I.; Kassayova, K. (2006) Law of the constant ratio. Towards a better list of citation superstars: compiling a multidisciplinary list of highly cited researchers, Research Evaluation, 15(3): 154-162.
• Raan, A.F.J. van (2006) Comparison of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judgement for 147 chemistry research groups, Scientometrics, 67(3): 491-502.
• Schreiber, M. (2008) To share the fame in a fair way, hm modifies h for multi-authored manuscripts, New Journal of Physics, 10: 040201-1-8.
• Seglen, P.O. (1997). Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. British Medical Journal, 314: 497-502.
• Sidiropoulos, A.; Katsaros, C.; Manolopoulos, Y. (2006) Generalized h-index for disclosing latent facts in citation networks, arXiv:cs.DL/0607066 v1 13 Jul 2006.
• Singh, G., Haddad, K. M., & Chow, C. W. 2007. Are articles in“top” management journals necessarily of higher quality? Journal of Management Inquiry, 16(4): 319331.
• Tahai, A. & Meyer, M. (1999). A revealed preference study of management journals' direct influences, Strategic Management Journal, 20: 279-296.
• Van Fleet, D., McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. 2000. A theoretical and empirical analysis of journal rankings: The case of formal lists. Journal of Management, 26(5): 839861.
• Vaughan, L.; Shaw, D. (2008) A new look at evidence of scholarly citations in citation indexes and from web sources. Scientometrics, 74(2), 317-330.
• Whitehouse, G.H. (2002). Impact factors: facts and myths. European Radiology, 12: 715-717.