Data integration in Scandinavia

Sivertsen, Gunnar

doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1817-x

Cited by 17 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although private firms also use bibliometrics, information concerning research performance assessment in the private sector is not systematically accessible and is thus not part of the present study. Additionally, several European countries are experimenting with the introduction of performance metrics to evaluate institutional funding and research on a national scale [24][25][26][27][28][29]. Italy demonstrated the most extensive use of bibliometric performance measurement during the observation period.…”

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 99%

Professional standards in bibliometric research evaluation? A meta-evaluation of European assessment practice 2005–2019

Jappe

2020

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite growing demand for practicable methods of research evaluation, the use of bibliometric indicators remains controversial. This paper examines performance assessment practice in Europe-first, identifying the most commonly used bibliometric methods and, second, identifying the actors who have defined widespread practices. The framework of this investigation is Abbott's theory of professions, and I argue that indicator-based research assessment constitutes a potential jurisdiction for both individual experts and expert organizations. This investigation was conducted using a search methodology that yielded 138 evaluation studies from 21 EU countries, covering the period 2005 to 2019. Structured content analysis revealed the following findings: (1) Bibliometric research assessment is most frequently performed in the Nordic countries, the Netherlands, Italy, and the United Kingdom. (2) The Web of Science (WoS) is the dominant database used for public research assessment in Europe. (3) Expert organizations invest in the improvement of WoS citation data, and set technical standards with regards to data quality. (4) Citation impact is most frequently assessed with reference to international scientific fields. (5) The WoS classification of science fields retained its function as a de facto reference standard for research performance assessment. A detailed comparison of assessment practices between five dedicated organizations and other individual bibliometric experts suggests that corporate ownership and limited access to the most widely used citation databases have had a restraining effect on the development and diffusion of professional bibliometric methods during this period.

show abstract

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 99%

Professional standards in bibliometric research evaluation? A meta-evaluation of European assessment practice 2005–2019

Jappe

2020

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These databases, and related university repositories that offer more or less complete publication records, provide new opportunities for the bibliometric research community. The origin of these databases is described elsewhere (Engels, Ossenblok, & Spruyt, 2012;Sile, Guns, Sivertsen, & Engels, 2017;Sivertsen, 2016b). What interests us is the type of bibliometric studies these databases make possible.…”

Section: The Second Period Of Bibliometric Scholarshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Science and its significant other: Representing the humanities in bibliometric scholarship

Franssen

Wouters

2019

Asso for Info Science & Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The cognitive and social structures, and publication practices, of the humanities have been studied bibliometrically for the past 50 years. This article explores the conceptual frameworks, methods, and data sources used in bibliometrics to study the nature of the humanities, and its differences and similarities in comparison with other scientific domains. We give a historical overview of bibliometric scholarship between 1965 and 2018 that studies the humanities empirically and distinguishes between two periods in which the configuration of the bibliometric system differs remarkably. The first period, 1965 to the 1980s, is characterized by bibliometric methods embedded in a sociological theoretical framework, the development and use of the Price Index, and small samples of journal publications from which references are used as data sources. The second period, the 1980s to the present day, is characterized by a new intellectual hinterland—that of science policy and research evaluation—in which bibliometric methods become embedded. Here metadata of publications becomes the primary data source with which publication profiles of humanistic scholarly communities are analyzed. We unpack the differences between these two periods and critically discuss the analytical avenues that different approaches offer.

show abstract

“…The first example is a little study of gender, age and productivity that we did some years ago, based on data in the Norwegian CRISTIN system (Sivertsen, 2016c). Here, gender, age and complete records of all peer reviewed scientific publications is among the available information for each active researcher.…”

Section: Research Papermentioning

confidence: 99%

The Norwegian Model in Norway

Sivertsen

2018

Journal of Data and Information Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The “Norwegian Model” attempts to comprehensively cover all the peer-reviewed scholarly literatures in all areas of research in one single weighted indicator. Thereby, scientific production is made comparable across departments and faculties within and between research institutions, and the indicator may serve institutional evaluation and funding. This article describes the motivation for creating the model in Norway, how it was designed, organized and implemented, as well as the effects and experiences with the model. The article ends with an overview of a new type of bibliometric studies that are based on the type of comprehensive national publication data that the Norwegian Model provides.

show abstract

Data integration in Scandinavia

Cited by 17 publications

References 10 publications

Professional standards in bibliometric research evaluation? A meta-evaluation of European assessment practice 2005–2019

Professional standards in bibliometric research evaluation? A meta-evaluation of European assessment practice 2005–2019

Science and its significant other: Representing the humanities in bibliometric scholarship

The Norwegian Model in Norway

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About