The Hirsch index helps achieve the greatest objectivity in evaluating a researcher's productivity. This indicator is calculated on the basis of specific data: the number of publications and the citations they receive. This is precisely what allows a researcher to understand which areas of their work they need to develop in order for their h-index to grow accordingly. However, there are cases where a scientist not only fails to increase this indicator, but significantly slows down its growth. Why does this happen?
Increasing the Hirsch index: what should you avoid doing?
Not all researchers fully understand which factors influence the growth of the h-index, and this is precisely why they make mistakes that, on the contrary, hold this indicator back. In one of our previous articles, we already discussed strategies that help increase it. This time, we will look at the opposite side of the issue – namely, which researcher actions most often slow down the growth of the h-index, and how to avoid them.
1. Weak Research
The success of any publication begins with the concept and quality of the research. If the author chooses a mediocre topic that has already been actively explored by other researchers, there is a risk that the article will offer nothing new and will go unnoticed among similar works. The same applies to research with weak methodology, an insufficient data sample, or superficial conclusions – reviewers and readers rarely trust such publications, and therefore rarely cite them.
So before starting work on a topic, check how thoroughly it has already been covered in the literature, and formulate what exactly will set your research apart from existing studies. Pay attention to methodology and the substantiation of conclusions, as these are the elements that most influence whether an article becomes a source of citations.
2. Choosing Journals Without Checking Their Reputation
There is a layer of predatory journals within the academic environment that engage in dishonest practices for the sake of profit. For the most part, they accept articles for a fee without proper peer review. This is, in fact, one of the most common reasons why citations of publications placed in them fail to grow.
Such journals are often not indexed in authoritative scientometric databases such as Scopus or Web of Science, and if they do get included, they are subsequently excluded due to violations of publishing standards. Because of the lack of quality peer review, such journals publish articles of low scientific value, which means researchers rarely reference them in their own work. As a result, even a large number of publications in journals of this kind fails to translate into growing citations – and therefore into a growing h-index.
To avoid falling for scammers, check the journal against several criteria: whether it is indexed in Scopus or Web of Science, the actual peer-review timelines, the average number of publications per issue (a sudden spike at some point may indicate dishonest practices), and whether the journal's scope matches your topic. These parameters are easy to check on the journal's website and in the databases themselves.
3. Chasing Quantity of Publications at the Expense of Quality
The desire to publish as many articles as possible within a short period often results in work that turns out superficial due to weak methodology, insufficiently substantiated conclusions, or a mediocre and irrelevant topic. Because of these factors, the value of the publication drops significantly, and it fails to attract the interest of other researchers.
So the most effective strategy is to work on quality rather than quantity. Choose fewer topics, but explore them in greater depth, and make sure your research offers a new approach or a way of solving a problem that is relevant to the academic community.
4. Ignoring Co-Authorship
A researcher who publishes only independently limits the audience of their work to their own circle of readers. Co-authorship, on the other hand, especially with more experienced or well-known scholars in the field, significantly increases an article's visibility and likelihood of being cited, since the work reaches the co-author's audience as well.
5. Incomplete or Duplicate Profiles in Scientific Databases
If a profile on Google Scholar, Scopus, or Web of Science is only partially filled in, or has duplicates under different variants of the author's name, some citations simply won't be counted when calculating the h-index.
To avoid this problem, it is worth regularly checking your own profiles on these platforms and merging any duplicates. It is also worth creating an ORCID, if you do not already have one, and citing it when submitting articles. This helps avoid confusion caused by different name variants or affiliations, and makes it easier to count citations correctly.
Improving your h-index is a systematic effort aimed at both the visibility and the quality of your research. Publishing in peer-reviewed journals, correctly maintaining your profiles in scientometric databases, and avoiding dishonest practices gradually build a stable citation dynamic. However, it is important to remember that the desired result may not come immediately, but only after a period of consistent work.
If you are having difficulty improving your h-index, Scientific Publications is ready to offer you its services. Our specialists will audit your researcher profile and develop an individual strategy for improving the indicator. Would you like a free consultation? Fill in the form below, and our manager will get in touch with you shortly. Together to new scientific achievements!
