1 / 20

Measuring Science (II)

Explore the sound and straightforward approach of measuring scientific performance based on scholarly publications using peer reviews and bibliometric analyses.

tinahernandez
Télécharger la présentation

Measuring Science (II)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Measuring Science (II) Morten Brendstrup-Hansen

  2. No science without scientific publications • Scientific publications are direct and tangible products of scientific activity • Therefore, the idea of a measure of scientific performance based on publications is sound and straightforward

  3. Peer review vs. bibliometric analysis • Peer review may be accurate, but is time consuming and may easily be (suspect of being) biased • The accuracy of a scholarly founded formal bibliometric analysis may be examined and its validity may be discussed • A bibliometric analysis is based on publicly available (and easily collected) data

  4. In bibliometrics, what should we count/calculate?Where do we find the data for bibliometric analyses?

  5. Total number of papers • Measures quantity, but does not take quality into account; does not give due weight to influence

  6. Number of 'quality papers' e.g. defined as papers in ISI-journals • Relies on the inclusion in a particular journal as a measure of quality instead of trying to assess the actual quality of the paper

  7. Total number of citations • Measures influence, but may be inflated by a small number of unrepresentative big hits

  8. Number of citations per paper • Punishes productivity

  9. Number of papers with >x citations • Combines publication data with citation data • Thus rewards quality as well as quantity if a fair value of x is chosen, • but different values of x need to be decided upon for different fields of research

  10. h-index • A scientist has the index h if h of his or her papers have at least h citations each - Hirsch JE (2005) PNAS 102(46): 16569-16572 Nc h h Np

  11. h-index • A scientist has the index h if h of his or her papers have at least h citations each - Hirsch JE (2005) PNAS 102(46): 16569-16572 Nc h h Np

  12. g-index • A set of papers has a g-index g if g is the highest rank such that the top g papers have, together, at least g2 citations - Egghe L (2006) Scientometrics 69(1):131-152

  13. This is only the beginning • More indices will probably be coined • Indices should be validated e.g. by testing their predicative power

  14. Software link • Publish or Perish is a piece of software that calculates several bibliometric indices from Google Scholar data. It is provided free of charge at http://www.harzing.com/

More Related