Differences in Researcher Rankings in Multiple Authorship–Oriented Research Fields Determined by Full Counting and Harmonic Counting

Abstract

ABSTRACTThis study explored whether harmonic counting, which emphasizes the position and role of authors in the author byline, produces researcher rankings (based on the number of articles published) that differ from those produced through full counting in multiple authorship–oriented research fields. An analysis of articles published during a 10‐year period (2012–2021) by 377 chemical engineering professors or associate professors revealed a significant and positive correlation between full counting rankings and harmonic counting rankings. This finding indicates that when multiple authorship is the predominant trend for researchers within a given field, full counting can be performed to quickly determine researcher productivity rankings because it is more straightforward than harmonic counting. Future research should explore other research fields with diverse publishing trends.