Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Harzing, Anne-Wil (2015)
Publisher: Springer
Languages: English
Types: Article
Author name ambiguity is a crucial problem in any type of bibliometric analysis. It arises when several authors share the same name, but also when one author expresses their name in different ways. This article focuses on the former, also called the “namesake” problem. In particular, we assess the extent to which this compromises the Thomson Reuters Essential Science Indicators (ESI) ranking of the top 1% most cited authors worldwide. We show that three demographic characteristics that should be unrelated to research productivity – name origin, uniqueness of one’s family name, and the number of initials used in publishing – in fact have a very strong influence on it.\ud \ud In contrast to what could be expected from Web of Science publication data, researchers with Asian names – and in particular Chinese and Korean names – appear to be far more productive than researchers with Western names. Furthermore, for any country, academics with common names and fewer initials also appear to be more productive than their more uniquely named counterparts. However, this appearance of high productivity is caused purely by the fact that these “academic superstars” are in fact composites of many individual academics with the same name. We thus argue that it is high time that Thomson Reuters starts taking name disambiguation in general, and non-Anglophone names in particular, more seriously.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Harzing, A. W. (2001). Who's in charge? An empirical study of executive staffing practices in foreign subsidiaries. Human Resource Management, 40(2), 139-158.
    • Harzing, A. W. (2013a). A preliminary test of Google Scholar as a source for citation data: a longitudinal study of Nobel prize winners. Scientometrics, 94(3), 1057-1075.
    • Harzing, A. W. (2013b). Document categories in the ISI Web of Knowledge: Misunderstanding the social sciences?. Scientometrics, 94(1), 23-34.
    • Heeffer, S., Thijs, B., Glänzel, W., (2008) Are Registered Authors More Productive? ISSI Newsletter, 2013, 9 (2), 29-32.
    • Qiu, J. (2008). Scientific publishing: Identity crisis. Nature News, 451(7180), 766-767.
    • Shin, D., Kim, T., Choi, J., & Kim, J. (2014). Author name disambiguation using a graph model with node splitting and merging based on bibliographic information. Scientometrics, 100(1), 15-50.
    • Strotmann, A., & Zhao, D. (2012). Author name disambiguation: What difference does it make in author‐based citation analysis? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(9), 1820-1833.
    • Wu, H., Li, B., Pei, Y., & He, J. (2014). Unsupervised author disambiguation using DempsterShafer theory. Scientometrics, 101(3), 1955-1972.
    • Zhu, J., Yang, Y., Xie, Q., Wang, L., & Hassan, S. U. (2014). Robust hybrid name disambiguation framework for large databases. Scientometrics, 98(3), 2255-2274.
    • Zhou, P., & Leydesdorff, L. (2006). The emergence of China as a leading nation in science. Research Policy, 35(1), 83-104.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article