Messung der akademischen Forschungsleistung in den Wirtschaftswissenschaften: Reputation vs. Zitierhäufigkeiten

Schläpfer, Felix; Schneider, Friedrich

doi:10.1111/j.1468-2516.2010.00342.x

Cited by 15 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Reputation in the current academic system is for the most part tied to high impact (journal) publications (Leahey, 2008;Schläpfer and Schneider, 2010), whereas intermediate products, such as data, have little to no exchange value. This explains why researchers strategically withhold datasets until they have published every aspect of them, as sharing too early would risk a competitive disadvantage.…”

Section: Discussion and Policy Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A reputation economy: how individual reward considerations trump systemic arguments for open access to data

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open access to research data has been described as a driver of innovation and a potential cure for the reproducibility crisis in many academic fields. Against this backdrop, policy makers are increasingly advocating for making research data and supporting material openly available online. Despite its potential to further scientific progress, widespread data sharing in small science is still an ideal practised in moderation. In this article, we explore the question of what drives open access to research data using a survey among 1564 mainly German researchers across all disciplines. We show that, regardless of their disciplinary background, researchers recognize the benefits of open access to research data for both their own research and scientific progress as a whole. Nonetheless, most researchers share their data only selectively. We show that individual reward considerations conflict with widespread data sharing. Based on our results, we present policy implications that are in line with both individual reward considerations and scientific progress.

show abstract

Section: Discussion and Policy Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A reputation economy: how individual reward considerations trump systemic arguments for open access to data

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To the best of our knowledge, only analyses of the relation between citation metrics and publication indicators have been undertaken to date with respect to the relation between research performance indicators. 5 For example, in their empirical analysis of German economics researchers, Schläpfer and Schneider (2010) conclude that there is only a weak correlation between citations and publications so that if citations are not taken into consideration as a performance indicator, important information on the character and quality of research performance of German economists will be lost. Furthermore, Waldkirch et al (2013) show that there is a difference between those rankings based on numbers of publications and those based on citation metrics.…”

Section: Previous Research Findings and Research Deficitsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Citation metrics as an additional indicator for evaluating research performance? An analysis of their correlations and validity

Clermont

Dirksen

Scheidt

et al. 2017

Bus Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluating the predictive ability of mortality forecasts is important yet difficult. Death rates and mean lifespan are basic life table functions typically used to analyze to what extent the forecasts deviate from their realized values. Although these parameters are useful for specifying precisely how mortality has been forecasted, they cannot be used to assess whether the underlying mortality developments are plausible. We therefore propose that in addition to looking at average lifespan, we should examine whether the forecasted variability of the age at death is a plausible continuation of past trends. The validation of mortality forecasts for Italy, Japan, and Denmark demonstrates that their predictive performance can be evaluated more comprehensively by analyzing both the average lifespan and lifespan disparity-that is, by jointly analyzing the mean and the dispersion of mortality. Approaches that account for dynamic age shifts in survival improvements appear to perform better than others that enforce relatively invariant patterns. However, because forecasting approaches are designed to capture trends in average mortality, we argue that studying lifespan disparity may also help to improve the methodology and thus the predictive ability of mortality forecasts.

show abstract

“…Forscher ermittelt und interpretiert z.B. mit Hilfe des persönlichen H‐Indexes (Ursprung und Zimmer 2007, Müller 2010, Schläpfer und Schneider 2010). Während das direkte Auszählen von Zitationen einzelner Artikel oder Wissenschaftler in der Vergangenheit mit prohibitiv hohen Kosten verbunden war, sodass die Reputation bzw.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Was lesen und schätzen deutschsprachige Ökonomen heute?

Bräuninger

Haucap²,

Muck³

2011

Perspektiven Der Wirtschaftspolitik

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present the results of a survey among the members of the German Economic Association (Verein für Socialpolitik) concerning the relevance and reputation of economic journals. Our results show that internationally oriented, English journals are rated as most relevant. German journals, however, receive a higher rating of relevance when compared to citation‐based methods. Moreover, while older economists favor policy‐oriented journals, younger economists largely prefer technically oriented ones. Internationally oriented journals also dominate the ranking of journals based on their reputation, whereas German journals fare rather poorly. While research‐oriented journals are perceived as more renowned than applied journals, we only find slight differences in the ratings across different age groups. Compared to our survey from the year 2000, all journals are rated as more relevant but less renowned. German journals are among the biggest losers, with an average loss of 30 ranks in the ranking of relevance and 16 ranks in the ranking of reputation.

show abstract

Messung der akademischen Forschungsleistung in den Wirtschaftswissenschaften: Reputation vs. Zitierhäufigkeiten

Cited by 15 publications

References 8 publications

A reputation economy: how individual reward considerations trump systemic arguments for open access to data

A reputation economy: how individual reward considerations trump systemic arguments for open access to data

Citation metrics as an additional indicator for evaluating research performance? An analysis of their correlations and validity

Was lesen und schätzen deutschsprachige Ökonomen heute?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About