Electronegativities of the elements (data page)

Electronegativity (Pauling scale)

Periodic table of electronegativity by Pauling scale
→ Atomic radius decreases → Ionization energy increases → Electronegativity increases →
	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17	18
Group →
↓ Period
1	H 2.20																	He
2	Li 0.98	Be 1.57											B 2.04	C 2.55	N 3.04	O 3.44	F 3.98	Ne
3	Na 0.93	Mg 1.31											Al 1.61	Si 1.90	P 2.19	S 2.58	Cl 3.16	Ar
4	K 0.82	Ca 1.00	Sc 1.36	Ti 1.54	V 1.63	Cr 1.66	Mn 1.55	Fe 1.83	Co 1.88	Ni 1.91	Cu 1.90	Zn 1.65	Ga 1.81	Ge 2.01	As 2.18	Se 2.55	Br 2.96	Kr 3.00
5	Rb 0.82	Sr 0.95	Y 1.22	Zr 1.33	Nb 1.6	Mo 2.16	Tc 1.9	Ru 2.2	Rh 2.28	Pd 2.20	Ag 1.93	Cd 1.69	In 1.78	Sn 1.96	Sb 2.05	Te 2.1	I 2.66	Xe 2.60
6	Cs 0.79	Ba 0.89		Hf 1.3	Ta 1.5	W 2.36	Re 1.9	Os 2.2	Ir 2.20	Pt 2.28	Au 2.54	Hg 2.00	Tl 1.62	Pb 1.87	Bi 2.02	Po 2.0	At 2.2	Rn 2.2
7	Fr 0.7[en 1]	Ra 0.9		Rf	Db	Sg	Bh	Hs	Mt	Ds	Rg	Cn	Nh	Fl	Mc	Lv	Ts	Og
			La 1.1	Ce 1.12	Pr 1.13	Nd 1.14	Pm 1.13	Sm 1.17	Eu 1.2	Gd 1.2	Tb 1.1	Dy 1.22	Ho 1.23	Er 1.24	Tm 1.25	Yb 1.1	Lu 1.27
			Ac 1.1	Th 1.3	Pa 1.5	U 1.38	Np 1.36	Pu 1.28	Am 1.13	Cm 1.28	Bk 1.3	Cf 1.3	Es 1.3	Fm 1.3	Md 1.3	No 1.3	Lr 1.3[en 2]
Values are given for the elements in their most common and stable oxidation states. See also: Electronegativities of the elements (data page) ↑ Electronegativity of francium was chosen by Pauling as 0.7, close to that of caesium (also assessed 0.7 at that point). The base value of hydrogen was later increased by 0.10 and caesium's electronegativity was later refined to 0.79; however, no refinements have been made for francium as no experiment has been conducted and the old value was kept. However, francium is expected and, to a small extent, observed to be less electropositive than caesium. See francium for details. ↑ See Brown, Geoffrey (2012). The Inaccessible Earth: An integrated view to its structure and composition. Springer Science & Business Media. p. 88. ISBN 9789401115162.

Notes

• Separate values for each source are only given where one or more sources differ.
• Electronegativity is not a uniquely defined property and may depend on the definition. The suggested values are all taken from WebElements as a consistent set.
• Many of the highly radioactive elements have values that must be predictions or extrapolations, but are unfortunately not marked as such. This is especially problematic for francium, which by relativistic calculations can be shown to be less electronegative than caesium, but for which the only value (0.7) in the literature predates these calculations. To avoid confusion, therefore, no value has been shown for francium, though a value around 0.8 might be expected.

Electronegativity (Allen scale)

References

WEL

As quoted at http://www.webelements.com/ from these sources:

• A.L. Allred, J. Inorg. Nucl. Chem., 1961, 17, 215.
• L. Pauling, The Nature of the Chemical Bond, Cornell Univ., USA, 3rd ed., 1960.
• J.E. Huheey, E.A. Keiter, and R.L. Keiter in Inorganic Chemistry : Principles of Structure and Reactivity, 4th edition, HarperCollins, New York, USA, 1993.

CRC

As quoted from these sources in an online version of: David R. Lide (ed), CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 84th Edition. CRC Press. Boca Raton, Florida, 2003; Section 9, Molecular Structure and Spectroscopy; Electronegativity

• Pauling, L., The Nature of the Chemical Bond, Third Edition, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, 1960.
• Allen, L.C., J. Am. Chem. Soc., 111, 9003, 1989.
• Allred, A.L., J. Inorg. Nucl. Chem., 17, 215, 1961.

LNG

As quoted from these sources in: J.A. Dean (ed), Lange's Handbook of Chemistry (15th Edition), McGraw-Hill, 1999; Section 4; Table 4.5, Electronegativities of the Elements.

• L. Pauling, The Chemical Bond, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, 1967.
• L. C. Allen, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 111:9003 (1989).
• A. L. Allred J. Inorg. Nucl. Chem. 17:215 (1961).