The Power of Scientometrics and the Development of Economics

Aistleitner, Matthias; Kapeller, Jakob; Steinerberger, Stefan

doi:10.1080/00213624.2018.1498721

Cited by 30 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Journal ranking can be beneficial for different purposes, such as a guide for libraries to select journals; it raises the standard of research and academic excellence since to publish on high ranked journals, authors need to produce a higher qualitative study. For economic researchers, journal ranking plays a core role, especially when it comes to selecting the relevant journals for publishing or reading (Schläpfer, 2012;Aistleitner et al, 2018). The main idea of journal ranking is to select or filter, for example, the top 5 or top 10 journals of a greater impact that researchers would like to publish their scientific work in or read articles from (Bornmann et al, 2017).…”

Section: Journal Rankings As a Source For Filtering Relevant Journalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Altmetrics for Digital Libraries. Concepts, Applications, Evaluation and Recommendations

Nuredini¹

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor Prof. Dr. Isabella Peters for supporting me during these past 6 years and for providing me guidance, encouragement, and kind advice throughout my research. She has been a key inspirational role model within my journey. I would also like to sincerely thank Prof. Dr. Klaus Tochtermann and Dr. Tamara Pianos for allowing me to work and research in such an excellent environment at ZBW (Leibniz Information Centre for Economic). Moreover, a special thanks to my ZBW colleagues, especially Dr. Nicholas Fraser and Steffen Lemke, for their useful and inspiring feedback on my PhD. Thank you to Dr. Guido Scherp and Dr. Atif Latif for their generous feedback that helped me throughout the way. I would also like to thank Bernd Schlünsen for his collaboration and support with integrating altmetrics data in some articles of EconBiz, which I used for my survey. In addition, I would also appreciate Thomas Arpe from the University of Kiel (CAU) for helping me with any server-related issues that were encountered when hosting and accessing my research data. Likewise, I owe thanks to Altmetric.com and Mendeley for offering me the opportunity to access and use the altmetric data for this research. To my wonderful husband, Nico Wichmann, I thank you not only for dealing with the challenges of PhD life but also for supporting me during hard times and while writing this thesis. Last but not least, I would like to thank my parents, who, in their worse days, showed support and motivated me to continue to study and research. Finally, I would like to thank my lovely sister, who was always there for me when I needed her most.

show abstract

Section: Journal Rankings As a Source For Filtering Relevant Journalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Altmetrics for Digital Libraries. Concepts, Applications, Evaluation and Recommendations

Nuredini¹

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similar changes in publication patterns have been documented elsewhere and in connection to the implementation of research evaluations. Bibliometric studies in economics show, for instance, that the use of scientometrics by members of the disciplinary community led to both the reinforcement of patterns of knowledge production and prestige and the stabilization of dominant scientific paradigms (Aistleitner, Kapeller, and Steinerberger 2018).…”

Section: Changing Knowledge Through Research Evaluationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research metrics, labor markets, and epistemic change: evidence from Britain 1970-2018

Guerra¹

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, I study the effects of quantifying knowledge on the organization of disciplinary fields. Using an original dataset of about 44,000 British social scientists and bibliographic information about their published, peer-reviewed articles, I show that the introduction of standardized research evaluations disrupted local academic labor markets in British higher education, leading to patterns of interinstitutional mobility that altered the epistemic diversity of social science disciplines and the organization of their academic fields. Much like market-based interventions, research evaluations lead to a form of epistemic matching that has distinct consequences on how knowledge is generated. In particular, when evaluations affect organizational units (such as academic departments) and stress disciplinary norms, they foster forms of isomorphism that lead to reductions in a discipline’s thematic diversity and a more homogeneous structure for the field. This paper thus advances the sociology of knowledge by showing how epistemic change occurs not only through the individual realignments of quantified scholars but, as importantly, through the mediation of interinstitutional mobility.

show abstract

“…The resulting lack of diversity within the economic discipline has been studied empirically, in particular by analyzing the relative citation flows between 13 high-ranked mainstream and 13 high-ranked heterodox economic journals in two different periods: before -2008Dobusch & Kapeller 2012b) and after the recent financial and economic crisis (2009Aistleitner et al 2018). The results indicate that the monistic and closed citation behavior exhibited by (highly-ranked) mainstream economic journals remained stable after the crisis, as the mainstream journals continue to devote only minimal attention to heterodox inputs (as is evidenced by the small share of citations -less than 3% -imported from heterodox sources 13 ; see Figure 9).…”

Section: Diversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Citation Patterns in Economics and Beyond

2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we comparatively explore three claims concerning the disciplinary character of economics by means of citation analysis. The three claims under study are: (1) economics exhibits strong forms of institutional stratification and, as a byproduct, a rather pronounced internal hierarchy, (2) economists strongly conform to institutional incentives and (3) modern mainstream economics is a largely selfreferential intellectual project mostly inaccessible to disciplinary or paradigmatic outsiders. The validity of these claims is assessed by means of an interdisciplinary comparison of citation patterns aiming to identify peculiar characteristics of economic discourse. In doing so, we emphasize that citation data can always be interpreted in different ways, thereby focusing on the contrast between a 'cognitive' and an 'evaluative' approach towards citation data.

show abstract

The Power of Scientometrics and the Development of Economics

Cited by 30 publications

References 28 publications

Altmetrics for Digital Libraries. Concepts, Applications, Evaluation and Recommendations

Altmetrics for Digital Libraries. Concepts, Applications, Evaluation and Recommendations

Research metrics, labor markets, and epistemic change: evidence from Britain 1970-2018

Citation Patterns in Economics and Beyond

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About