Inter-ranking reputational effects: an analysis of the Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) and the Times Higher Education World University Rankings (THE) reputational relationship

Abstract

Global university rankings have become a critical factor in the higher education sector, engendering increasing interest and exerting a notable influence over a wide variety of stakeholders. They are presented to different audiences as tools that evaluate and rank universities according to quality. However, some authors are of the opinion that rankings express reputational factors to a large extent. This article presents a model of the intraand inter-ranking relationships from the perspective of reputation along with an empirical study on two of the most influential rankings: the Academic Ranking of World Universities and the Times Higher Education World University Rankings. Data from these two rankings between 2010 and 2018, and the application of ordinal regressions, provide evidence that both rankings are mutually influential, generating intra and reciprocal reputational effects over time.

A longitudinal analysis of university rankings

“…This effect is likely to be strongest in the THE and QS rankings because these use reputation surveys, which are likely to be influenced by previous rankings. However, research by Safón (2019) shows that previous rankings might also influence research performance, indicating there might an additional circular effect present in the ARWU ranking. These processes are further elaborated on in Section 6.1.…”

“…For another perspective on stability, we refer readers to Gingras (2016). Circular effects between ranking years, as described by Safón (2019) and Robinson-Garcia et al (2019), could also results in the rankings being stable. The plots created in this research did not indicate the existence of such effects, but the correlation between reputation and research performance can be taken as evidence for the claim made by Safón (2019) that research performance is also influenced by prior rankings.…”

Moscow International University Ranking: critical review and geopolitical effects

“…Obviously, these slight differences are not distinguishable when (Spearman) correlating the distribution of countries for each global ranking (Table 3), as a mimicry phenomenon emerges between university rankings due to the reputational bias in the top positions (Safón, 2019;Docampo, 2020). This phenomenon stabilizes in the lower positions where small performance variations change the weight of indicators over time, and/or the inclusion of new universities can lead to large changes in positions, especially due to the strong volatility in the data (Saisana; D'Hombres; Saltelli, 2011; Pérez-Esparrells; Orduña-Malea, 2018).…”

Winning and Losing Relationship: A New Method of University Ranking in the Case of Countries along the Belt and Road

“…e two most important indicators in the QS and the ranking (academic reputation and employer reputation; these two indicators account for half of the weights) are based on global surveys [26,27]. Yet, these surveys cannot reflect the exact quality of academic research and education due to the limited data, the subjective measurement, and the lack of transparency, which makes these two indicators highly problematic.…”