# A review of the characteristics of 108 author-level bibliometric indicators

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/1408.5700 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/1408.5700/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 25 Aug 2014.

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [Impact-Oriented Contextual Scholar Profiling using Self-Citation Graphs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.12217/) (2023)
- [Where Do Your Citations Come From? Citation-Constellation: A Free, Open-Source, No-Code, and Auditable Tool for Citation Network Decomposition with Complementary BARON and HEROCON Scores](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.24216/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

An increasing demand for bibliometric assessment of individuals has led to a growth of new bibliometric indicators as well as new variants or combinations of established ones. The aim of this review is to contribute with objective facts about the usefulness of bibliometric indicators of the effects of publication activity at the individual level. This paper reviews 108 indicators that can potentially be used to measure performance on the individual author level, and examines the complexity of their calculations in relation to what they are supposed to reflect and ease of end-user application.