Peer reviews and bibliometric indicators: a comparative study at a Norwegian university

Aksnes, Dag W.; Taxt, Randi Elisabeth

doi:10.3152/147154404781776563

Cited by 148 publications

(116 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

108

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Third, Bar-Ilan (2007) showed that the rankings of scientists based on the three different citation databases are highly correlated, varying between 0.884 and 0.780 in terms of the Spearman index (Spearman 1904). However, the use of the different citation databases may significantly alter the relative ranking of scientists with mid-range rankings (Aksnes & Taxt 2004, Meho & Yang 2007.…”

Section: The Use Of Citation Databasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Proponents have reported the validity and reliability of citation indexes in research assessments, as well as the positive correlation between publications/citation counts and the results of peer review evaluations (Aksnes & Taxt 2004, Glänzel 1996, Kostoff 1996, Martin 1996, Narin 1976, So 1998, van Raan 2000. On the other hand, critics claim that the validity of citation indexes is limited by the assumption that a scientist's relevance is expressed solely by the number of papers published or the number of citations received (MacRoberts & MacRoberts 1996, Seglen 1998.…”

Section: The Use Of Citation Databasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessing the scientific productivity of Italian forest researchers using the Web of Science, SCOPUS and SCIMAGO databases

Chirici¹

2012

iForest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

© iForest -Biogeosciences and Forestry IntroductionThe quantitative evaluation of researchers' activity is based on the principle that scientific productivity is related to the degree to which the results of investigations are published. Research performance is a multidimensional concept influenced by the ability of researchers to accomplish multiple tasks, including publishing, teaching, fund-raising, public relations, participation to meetings and conferences, and administrative duties (Nagpaul 1995). In this context, publishing capacity must be seen not only as a task for researchers but also as an indicator of research performance.Evaluation of researcher productivity follows two main approaches: (i) peer-review, which entails researchers submitting their products to panels of appointed experts who conduct evaluations; and (ii) bibliometric, which entails calculation of indexes based on numbers of publications and citations.The latter indexes may also be used to inform peer-review evaluations. The literature debating the pros and cons of both approaches is vast. Abramo & D'Angelo (2011a) provide a recent overview contrasting the peer-review and the bibliometric systems for national research assessments.In Italy, research evaluation has been "strongly neglected" in the past (Abramo et al. 2011 Agenzia Nazionale per la Valutazione delSistema Universitario e della Ricerca) and the National University Council (CUN, Consiglio Nazionale Universitario) proposed bibliometric methods and a set of criteria to this purpose. This new evaluation system will serve as the basis for assessing the qualifications of candidates for new research positions in universities and other research institutions and for annual budget allocations from MIUR to universities and research institutes.The CUN (2011) announced multiple recommendations specifically addressing different thematic areas of the Italian research system. For the agriculture and veterinary area, one of the proposed main criteria was the number of scientific publications in journals included in the Thomson Reuters Web of Science (WOS) and/or in the Elsevier SciVerse SCOPUS. The ANVUR (2011) and CUN (2011) proposed adoption of several criteria based on the number of publications, number of citations, and the h-index calculated using the SCOPUS or WOS databases. Both CUN (2011) andANVUR (2011) focus more on the criteria to be used in the evaluations than on the databases which they consider as equivalent. Citation databasesCitation databases, also called bibliographic databases, are used to combine information related to bibliographic productivity and to facilitate the identification of authors of publications and sources of publication citations. A large number of thematic citation databases are available, but their coverage is limited to specific academic or scientific areas. Other databases are more general and have been constructed to cover the overall academic productivity. Web of Science, SCOPUS and Google Scholar are the most well-known databases, and all three are...

show abstract

Section: The Use Of Citation Databasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Use Of Citation Databasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the scientific productivity of Italian forest researchers using the Web of Science, SCOPUS and SCIMAGO databases

Chirici¹

2012

iForest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another important impact indices and methods are planned to investigate in the near future, e.g. g-index (Egghe, 2006), highly cited papers (Aksnes, 2003;Aksnes & Taxt, 2004), percentile distribution of publications by citation Leydesdorff & Opthof, 2011).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Would it be possible to increase the Hirsch-index, π-index or CDS-index by increasing the number of publications or citations only by unity?

Vinkler

2013

Journal of Informetrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the study is to explore the effects of the increase in the number of publications or citations on several impact indicators by a single journal paper or citation. The possible change of the h-index, A-index, R-index, -index, -rate, Journal Paper Citedness (JPC), and Citation Distribution Score (CDS) is followed by models. Particular attention is given to the increase of the indices by a single plus citation. The results obtained by the "Successively Built-up Indicator" model show that with increasing number of citations or self-citations the indices may increase substantially.

show abstract

“…In general, it is recognized that peer or expert surveys have various limitations and shortcomings. In particular, the outcomes of a peer review process may contain errors nearly 50 % because of human chance and randomness [14][15][16]. However, patents can be regarded as realizations of technologies, and patent statistics would therefore be sufficient for TLEs [17,18].…”

Section: The Demands For Data-based Tlesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technological-level evaluation using patent statistics: model and application in mobile communications

Cho

Park

2014

Cluster Comput

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Information and communication technology (ICT) has been a driving force of development for knowledgebased economies. In particular, as competition in mobile communications technological innovation among nations becomes more intense, there are growing demands for improved evaluation, judgment, and prediction of mobile communications technological capability in order to improve national ICT competitiveness. Technological capability refers to conceptual-level elements that capture technological competitiveness in operation. A technological level can be defined for making comparisons of one technological capability with another. Patent statistics have been used by economists and researchers in the field of innovation to analyze current and forecast technological directions. This paper evaluates relative technological capability in terms of patent statistics for some technology domains. We propose a patent statistic model for relative technological capability based on patent activity, intensity, market-power, and citation index for mobile communications technologies at a national level. In particular, it gives a technological-level evaluation of 3G, 3G transitional, and 4G mobile communications for the US, EU, Japan, China, and Korea.

show abstract

Peer reviews and bibliometric indicators: a comparative study at a Norwegian university

Cited by 148 publications

References 7 publications

Assessing the scientific productivity of Italian forest researchers using the Web of Science, SCOPUS and SCIMAGO databases

Assessing the scientific productivity of Italian forest researchers using the Web of Science, SCOPUS and SCIMAGO databases

Would it be possible to increase the Hirsch-index, π-index or CDS-index by increasing the number of publications or citations only by unity?

Technological-level evaluation using patent statistics: model and application in mobile communications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About