Scientific eminence historical and contemporary: A measurement assessment

It was shown that archival indicators of scientific eminence are both reliable and consistent with other scientometric procedures.

Abstract

In some studies of scientific creativity it has proved useful to assess the differential eminence of scientists according to their presence in historical record (as registered by scholarly works). To determine the research utility of such indicators, a sample of 2026 scientists spanning several centuries and nationalities was taken from three biographical dictionaires of science. The eminence of each scientist was gauged 23 distinct ways using a diversity of reference works (e.g., histories, biographical dictionaires, encyclopedias, etc.) and variable operationalizations (e.g., space measures, ratings, rankings, etc.). Despite minor discrepancies due mainly to the degree of timewise bias and reference work type, a factor analysis demonstrated the existence of a pervasive concensus. A linear composite of these measures had an α reliability of 0.78. Further, it was shown that (a) the reliability of assessed eminence somewhat declines as it is applied to more recently born scientists, (b) the reliability remains high within separate disciplines and nationalities, and (c) assessed eminence, once complex time trends are controlled, correlates positively with the more commonly used citation counts, especially the number of cited publications. Hence, archival indicators of scientific eminence are both reliable and consistent with other scientometric procedures.