Notes

Opinion

Los resultados del REF2014 del Reino Unido marca el…

Entrada publicada originalmente en el Blok de BiD el día 13 de diciembre de 2017.

Empiezan a aparecer nuevas noticias sobre el REF2021, el ejercicio evaluativo más importante para el sistema científico en el Reino Unido. Se tratará de la segunda ocasión en la que se evalúa a las universidades británicas según el sistema actual. Aprovechando la proximidad de dicho ejercicio, aprovechamos para comentar los resultados de su primera implementación allá en 2014 e introducir algunas reflexiones sobre las importantes novedades que introduce en el sistema de evaluación británico. Read more “Los resultados del REF2014 del Reino Unido marca el camino a seguir en la evaluación científica”

Paper notes

Notes on papers I read this week (I)

Cañibano, C. & Bozeman, B. Curriculum vitae method in science policy and research evaluation: the state-of-the-art. Research Evaluation, 18(2), 86-94

This paper reviews the use of CV analysis in science policy. The value of CVs lies in the fact that they serve as personal services advertisement and the fact that researchers are strongly encouraged to provide timely and accurate data. Until early 1990s CV analysis has been used anecdotally and as complementary. However, the Research Value Mapping programme developed by Bozeman and Rogers among others, has fostered its expansion as a solid methodology. Contrarily to other methodological approaches, CV analysis is characterized by being theory-driven. There are three main research topics in which this method has been applied: Career trajectories, mobility and mapping collective capacity. However, CV analysis is not free of many methodological limitations, namely: availability, heterogeneity, truncation, missing information, and coding inconsistency. They suggest solving part of this problems by complementing the data with other sources such as bibliometric data or survey data. Read more “Notes on papers I read this week (I)”

Opinion

Scientific excellence is just one of the many paths…

Recently the LSE Impact blog posted and entry by Richard Woolley and I where we comment on the dangers of trying to link scientific excellence and societal impact. Assessing the societal impact of research is now the big challenge in research evaluation. Until recently, evaluative and policy efforts were placed on promoting the so-called ‘excellent research’, following the logic that it is the best research the one that can lead to social change and respond to current societal challenges. But the UK 2014 REF has been a game-changer by introducing a complex peer review system by which committees assess the impact of submitted case studies in which researchers explain how their research has contributed to society (in which ever terms they find suitable). Read more “Scientific excellence is just one of the many paths to societal impact”

Self-promotion

International collaboration: It is not only a matter of…

Collaboration through co-authorship is a long studied field of work in scientometrics. The notion of international collaboration has been widely acknowledged through bibliometric data as a positive factor to improve the citation impact and visibility of publications. What is more, the share of international collaboration is an indicator of success used in many evaluation exercises at the individual level (e.g., Ramón y Cajal in Spain) and it is included in the set of indicators pre-calculated in many bibliometric suites such as Clarivate’s InCites. Read more “International collaboration: It is not only a matter of with whom but with how many?”

Bibliographies

Living bibliography on Open Access

Bachrach, S. (1998, September 4). INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY:Who Should Own Scientific Papers? Science. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.281.5382.1459
Björk, B.-C., Welling, P., Laakso, M., Majlender, P., Hedlund, T., & Guðnason, G. (2010, June 23). Open Access to the Scientific Journal Literature: Situation 2009. (E. Scalas, Ed.), PLoS ONE. Public Library of Science (PLoS). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0011273
Bohannon, J. (2016, April 28). Who’s downloading pirated papers? Everyone. Science. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.352.6285.508
Chawla, D. S. (2017). Unpaywall finds free versions of paywalled papers. Nature.
Cullen, R., & Chawner, B. (2011, December). Institutional Repositories, Open Access, and Scholarly Communication: A Study of Conflicting Paradigms. The Journal of Academic Librarianship. Elsevier BV. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2011.07.002
Gargouri, Y., Hajjem, C., Larivière, V., Gingras, Y., Carr, L., Brody, T., & Harnad, S. (2010, October 18). Self-Selected or Mandated, Open Access Increases Citation Impact for Higher Quality Research. (R. P. Futrelle, Ed.), PLoS ONE. Public Library of Science (PLoS). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0013636
Ginsparg, P. (2006, September 20). As We May Read. Journal of Neuroscience. Society for Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.3161-06.2006
Ginsparg, Paul. (1997, May). Winners and Losers in the Global Research Village. The Serials Librarian. Informa UK Limited. https://doi.org/10.1300/j123v30n03_13
Haque, A., & Ginsparg, P. (2009, November). Positional effects on citation and readership in arXiv. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21166
Laakso, M., Welling, P., Bukvova, H., Nyman, L., Björk, B.-C., & Hedlund, T. (2011, June 13). The Development of Open Access Journal Publishing from 1993 to 2009. (M. Hermes-Lima, Ed.), PLoS ONE. Public Library of Science (PLoS). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0020961
Moed, H. F. (2007). The effect of “open access” on citation impact: An analysis of ArXiv’s condensed matter section. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20663
Whitfield, J. (2012, February 9). Elsevier boycott gathers pace. Nature. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature.2012.10010

Read more “Living bibliography on Open Access”

Bibliographies

A living bibliography on the evaluation of monographs

Giménez-Toledo, E., Mañana-Rodríguez, J., Engels, T. C. E., Ingwersen, P., Pölönen, J., Sivertsen, G., … Zuccala, A. A. (2016, February 15). Taking scholarly books into account: current developments in five European countries. Scientometrics. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1886-5
Ossenblok, T. L. B., Verleysen, F. T., & Engels, T. C. E. (2014, January 22). Coauthorship of journal articles and book chapters in the social sciences and humanities (2000-2010). Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23015
Torres-Salinas, D., & Moed, H. F. (2009, January). Library Catalog Analysis as a tool in studies of social sciences and humanities: An exploratory study of published book titles in Economics. Journal of Informetrics. Elsevier BV. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2008.10.002
Torres-Salinas, D., Robinson-García, N., Cabezas-Clavijo, Á., & Jiménez-Contreras, E. (2013, November 7). Analyzing the citation characteristics of books: edited books, book series and publisher types in the book citation index. Scientometrics. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1168-4
Torres-Salinas, D., Robinson-García, N., Jiménez- Contreras, E., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2012, November 29). Towards a “Book Publishers Citation Reports”. First approach using the “ Book Citation Index.” Revista española de Documentación Científica. Departmento de Publicaciones del CSIC. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2012.4.1010
Torres-Salinas, D., Robinson-Garcia, N., Miguel Campanario, J., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2014, January 8). Coverage, field specialisation and the impact of scientific publishers indexed in the Book Citation Index. Online Information Review. Emerald. https://doi.org/10.1108/oir-10-2012-0169
Torres-Salinas, D., Rodríguez-Sánchez, R., Robinson-García, N., Fdez-Valdivia, J., & García, J. A. (2013, April). Mapping citation patterns of book chapters in the Book Citation Index. Journal of Informetrics. Elsevier BV. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.01.004
Verleysen, F. T., & Engels, T. C. E. (2012, December 21). A label for peer-reviewed books. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22836
Verleysen, F. T., & Engels, T. C. E. (2014, January). Barycenter representation of book publishing internationalization in the Social Sciences and Humanities. Journal of Informetrics. Elsevier BV. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.11.008
Verleysen, F. T., & Ossenblok, T. L. B. (2017, March 3). Profiles of monograph authors in the social sciences and humanities: an analysis of productivity, career stage, co-authorship, disciplinary affiliation and gender, based on a regional bibliographic database. Scientometrics. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2312-3
Zuccala, A. (2012, August 22). Quality and influence in literary work: evaluating the “educated imagination.” Research Evaluation. Oxford University Press (OUP). https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvs017
Zuccala, Alesia, Guns, R., Cornacchia, R., & Bod, R. (2014, November 6). Can we rank scholarly book publishers? A bibliometric experiment with the field of history. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23267
Zuccala, Alesia, & van Leeuwen, T. (2011, July 20). Book reviews in humanities research evaluations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21588
Zuccala, Alesia, van Someren, M., & van Bellen, M. (2014, April 24). A machine-learning approach to coding book reviews as quality indicators: Toward a theory of megacitation. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23104