Bryansk, Bryansk, Russian Federation
The advantages and disadvantages of indices for assessing scientists’ activities using the scientometric databases Web of Science (USA), Scopus (EU) and RSCI (RF) are considered. It is proposed to use such indicators as the citation index and the publication relevance index to objectify the data in addition to the known indicators, namely the number of publications, the number of links, the average number of citations per publication, the Hirsch index. It is shown that the main disadvantage of the h-index proposed by the American physicist Jorge Hirsch for assessing ergonomists’ scientific activities is not taking into account the relevance of breakthrough scientific results and inventions. The rating of 25 leading domestic psychologists and 25 domestic ergonomists is given, which is obtained from the RSCI database and it includes such indicators as the number of publications, the total number of citations, the average number of citations, the average number of citations per publication, and the Hirsch index. It is concluded that using relevance and citation indices is, to a certain extent, evidence of this scholar’ official recognition by the scientific community and the formal confirmation of his authority. It is shown that applying scientometric citation indices and their correct use in assessing scientists’ activities should be carried out by the qualified experts in the relevant field of knowledge.
psychology, ergonomics, publication activity, scientometric indicators, citation indices, rating of scientists, importance of publications, correlation-regression rating model
1. Alisov A.A., Kondratenko S.V., Kuzmenko A.A., Morozova A.V., Spasennikov V.V. History of the Electronic Edition Creation and Objectives of the Journal “Ergodesign”. Ergodizayn [Ergodesign], 2018, no. 1 (01), pp. 5-9. DOI: 10.30987 / article_5bbf0a8a47a1d1.47400349.
2. Arefiev P.G., Eremenko G.O., Glukhov V.A. The Russian Science Citation Index - a Tool for Science Analysis. Bibliosfera [Bibliosphere], 2012, no. 5, pp. 66-71.
3. Dikaya L.G. Contribution of the Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences into the Development of Space Psychology. Natsional'nyy psikhologicheskiy zhurnal [National Psychological Journal], 2011, vol. 1, no 5, pp. 78-84.
4. Zankovsky A.N., Zhuravlev A.L. Tendencies of the Development of Organizational Psychology. Psikhologicheskiy zhurnal [Psychological Journal], 2017, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 77-88.
5. Zarakovskiy G.M. Experience of Ergonomic Design of Flexible Automated Plants in Mechanical Engineering Chelovecheskiy faktor: problemy psikhologii i ergonomiki [Human Factor: Problems of Psychology and Ergonomics], 2009, vol. 3, no 10, pp. 48-55.
6. Zinchenko V.P., Munipov V.M. Fundamentals of Ergonomics. Moscow, Moscow State University, 1980, 338 p.
7. Kryuchkov B.I., Kharlamov M.M., Kuritsyn A.A., Usov V.M. Cosmonaut Selection: Experience and Forecasts. Vozdushno-kosmicheskaya sreda [Air and Space Environ-ment], 2018, vol. 2, no 95, pp. 96-107.
8. Lvov V.M., Pavlyuchenko V.V., Spasennikov V.V. Engineering-Psychological Problems of Designing Operators’ Activity. Psikhologicheskiy zhurnal [Psychological Journal], 1989, vol.10, no. 5, pp. 66-74.
9. Lomov B. F. Methodological Problems of Psychology. Moscow, Nauka, 1984, 444 p.
10. Munipov V.M., Zinchenko V.P. Ergonomics: Human Centred Design of Hardware, Software and Environment. Moscow, Publishing house “PerSe”, 2010. 646 p.
11. Nechaev A.P., Stepanova S.I., Bronnikov S.V., Shevchenko L.G., Ivanenko N.V. Study of the Interaction between Intensity of Cosmonauts’ Work- Rest Schedule and Frequency of Crew Erroneous Actions on the International Space Station. Aviatsionnaya i ekologicheskaya meditsina [Aerospace and Environmental Medicine], 2019, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 39-52.
12. Novikov D.A. Pomeryaemsya “Hirshami”? (Reflec-tions on Scientometrics). Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii [Higher Education in Russia], 2015, no. 2, pp. 5-13.
13. Polyanin A.D. Disadvantages of Citation Index and Hirsch and Using Other Scientometrics. Matematicheskoe modelirovanie i chislennye metody [Mathematical Modelling and Numerical Methods], 2014, no 1, pp. 131-144.
14. Sergeev S.F. Forgotten Pages of Soviet Engineering Psychology. Psikhologicheskiy zhurna [Psychological Journal], 2013, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 101-105.
15. Spasennikov V.V., Molchanova N.V., Skantsev V.M. Discussion Issues of Evaluation of the Scientific Activity Effectiveness Using Citation Indices (Review of Domestic and Foreign Publications). Ergodizayn [Ergodesign], 2019, vol. 4, no. 6, pp. 186-195. DOI: 10.30987 / 2619-1512-2019-2019-4-186-195.
16. Spasennikov V.V. Scientific Article as a Means of Ef-fective Communication: Recommendations for Writing and Formatting. Ergodizayn [Ergodesign], 2020, vol. 2, no. 8, pp. 51-57. DOI: 10.30987 / 2658-4026-2020-2-51-57.
17. Fedorov O.G. Scientific Activity and Development of Science: Situational Analysis, Statement of Urgent Problems. Sotsial'nye otnosheniya [Social Relations], 2018, vol. 1, no 24, pp. 158-170.
18. Shtovba S.D., Shtovba E.V. A Survey on Scientomet-ric Indicators for Assessment of Researcher’s Publication Ac-tivity. Upravlenie bol'shimi sistemami [Large-Scale Systems Control], 2013, vol. 44, pp. 262-278.
19. Shlaen P. Ya., Lviv V.M. Models of Human Activity in Ergatic Systems. Moscow, Moscow Aviation Institute, 1997, 127 p.
20. Kulaykina V.I., Chainova L.D. Ergodesign of Indus-trial Products and Subject-Spatial Environment. Moscow, Humanitarian Publishing Centre VLADOS, 2009, 311 p.
21. Ergonomics: Principles and Recommendations. Methodical Guidance. Moscow, All-Russian Research Institute of Technical Aesthetics, 1991, 127 p.
22. Lvov V.M., Shlaen P.Ya. Ergonomics for Engineers. Tver, Ergocentre, 2008, 474 p.
23. Yurevich A.V., Tsapenko I.N. Efficiency of National Social Science and Humanities: Scientometric Approach. Upravlenie bol'shimi sistemami [Large-Scale Systems Control]. Issue “Scientometrics and Expertise in Science Management”. Moscow, Institute of Control Sciences RAN, 2013, pp. 408-420.
24. Yakimchik A.I. Citation Databases and Researcher Identifiers. Geofizicheskiy zhurnal [Geophysical Journal], 2020, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 78-108.
25. Alimova N.K., Brumstein Y.M. Russia and Post-Soviet Countries Compared: Coverage of Papers by Scopus and Web of Science, Languages and Productivity of Research-ers. European Science Editing 46: e53192, April 2020. DOI: 10.3897 / ese.2020.e53192.
26. Kristof-Brown A.L., Zimmerman R.D., Johnson E.C. Consequences of Individuals’ Fit at Work: a Meta-analysis of Person-job, Person-Organization, Person-Group And Person-Supervisor Fit. Psikhologiya personala [Journal of Personnel Psychology], 2005, vol. 58, pp. 281-342.
27. Hirch J.E. An Index to Quantify an Individual’s Scientific Research Output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2005, vol.102, no.46, pp. 16569-16572. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102.
28. Hendrick H.W. Human Factors in Organizational De-sign and Management. Ergonomika [Ergonomics], 1991, no. 54, pp. 734-756.
29. Spasennikov V. Androsov K., Golubeva G. Ergo-nomic Factors in Patenting Computer Systems for Personnel’s Selection and Training. Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Computer Graphics and Machine Vision (GraphiCon 2020). Saint-Petersburg, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2020.
30. Top 100 Most Cited Teachers in Russia. Bulletin of the Institute of Human Education, 2016, no. 1, http://eidos-institute.ru/journal/2016/100 (Accessed: 10 September 2021).
