Evaluation of Institutional Research Productivity

The quantification of scholarly performance has become an obvious necessity in many academic pursuits. Evaluation of research output is, therefore, an integral element of R&D institutions worldwide. This paper critically scrutinizes the literature on research productivity concerning scientific institutions (include universities and departments) in an informational context. It provides a thorough review to map the quantum of knowledge relating to ‘institutional research productivity’ correlating the Indian vista. The paper also offers a few recommendations to undertake evaluative studies with caution. Thus it shows a coherent picture of this emerging area in the sociology of science

To publish or not to publish? On the aggregation and drivers of research performance

This paper presents a methodology to aggregate multidimensional research output. Using a tailored version of the non-parametric Data Envelopment Analysis model, we account for the large heterogeneity in research output and the individual researcher preferences by endogenously weighting the various output dimensions. The approach offers three important advantages compared to the traditional approaches: (1) flexibility in the aggregation of different research outputs into an overall evaluation score; (2) a reduction of the impact of measurement errors and a-typical observations; and (3) a correction for the influences of a wide variety of factors outside the evaluated researcher’s control. As a result, research evaluations are more effective representations of actual research performance. The methodology is illustrated on a data set of all faculty members at a large polytechnic university in Belgium. The sample includes questionnaire items on the motivation and perception of the researcher. This allows us to explore whether motivation and background characteristics (such as age, gender, retention, etc.,) of the researchers explain variations in measured research performance

What do editorial boards indicate about the nature, structure and directions of scholarly research?

Mestrado em Economia e Gestão de Ciência, Tecnologia e InovaçãoO output científico no que diz respeito às publicações está relativamente restrito a determinadas regiões. Países cientificamente desenvolvidos representam uma maioria significativa no que toca ao número de publicações, aquando comparados com países em desenvolvimento. Neste caso, indicadores bibliométricos são ferramentas úteis para efetuar comparações e identificar assimetrias. Revistas académicas são o método mais comum de publicação de artigos científicos e a sua importância para a disseminação de conhecimento é inquestionável. Os artigos submetidos são sujeitos a escrutínio e seleção, sendo essa função praticada pelos conselhos editoriais. Esta dissertação tem como foco o estudo dos conselhos editoriais de revistas académicas na área da economia do desenvolvimento em três regiões: África, Ásia e América Latina. Com o intuito de comparar as revistas destas três regiões com mais reputadas, revistas líder na área da economia do desenvolvimento foram igualmente analisadas. Este estudo explora uma área pouco investigada, pois embora o interesse pelas estruturas dos conselhos editoriais tenha vindo a aumentar, não foram encontrados resultados sobre revistas focadas em estudos de regiões ou países. Agrupando os editores, várias variáveis foram estudadas: género, proveniência geográfica, afiliação institucional e relevância científica, no sentido de identificar características na intermediação científica. Regiões nativas ao foco das revistas são pouco representadas, especialmente África e América Latina. A representação feminina está em minoria, representando apenas pouco mais de um quarto da população editorial. Finalmente, foi calculada uma relação positiva entre o impacto das revistas e a performance dos editores.Research output regarding publications is relatively polarized in a few regions. The majority of the published articles are written in English, but developed countries comprise an astounding difference when compared to developing ones. In this case, bibliometric indicators are used to measure these statistics, and asymmetries have been found through the time. Journals are the most common method of publication, and their importance to the dissemination of knowledge is undeniable since submitted articles are subjected to scrutiny and selection by their own internal governance. This dissertation focuses on the editorial boards' structure of leading journals covering development studies in three regions: Africa, Asia and Latin America, and in order to compare outlets covering studies in these regions with more impactful journals, leading ones from the development economics' subject field were also analysed. This study explores a relatively unknown area since although the interest about the journals' internal governance has been increasing, there are no significant findings on patterns and characteristics in the intermediation of studies focused on regions or countries. Gathering the editorial boards, several variables were studied: gender, geography, affiliation and research relevance. Native regions are found to be less represented in the respective studies' journals than expected, principally Africa and Latin America. Women editors are a minority, representing little over a quarter of the editorial population. A positive relation between the editors' relevance and impact of the journal was also found. Providing a scientometric analysis, patterns are discussed.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

The metric tide: report of the independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment and management

This report presents the findings and recommendations of the Independent Review of the Role of Metrics in Research Assessment and Management. The review was chaired by Professor James Wilsdon, supported by an independent and multidisciplinary group of experts in scientometrics, research funding, research policy, publishing, university management and administration. This review has gone beyond earlier studies to take a deeper look at potential uses and limitations of research metrics and indicators. It has explored the use of metrics across different disciplines, and assessed their potential contribution to the development of research excellence and impact. It has analysed their role in processes of research assessment, including the next cycle of the Research Excellence Framework (REF). It has considered the changing ways in which universities are using quantitative indicators in their management systems, and the growing power of league tables and rankings. And it has considered the negative or unintended effects of metrics on various aspects of research culture. The report starts by tracing the history of metrics in research management and assessment, in the UK and internationally. It looks at the applicability of metrics within different research cultures, compares the peer review system with metric-based alternatives, and considers what balance might be struck between the two. It charts the development of research management systems within institutions, and examines the effects of the growing use of quantitative indicators on different aspects of research culture, including performance management, equality, diversity, interdisciplinarity, and the ‘gaming’ of assessment systems. The review looks at how different funders are using quantitative indicators, and considers their potential role in research and innovation policy. Finally, it examines the role that metrics played in REF2014, and outlines scenarios for their contribution to future exercises

Research and collaboration overview of Institut Pasteur International Network: a bibliometric approach toward research funding decisions

Background: Institut Pasteur International Network (IPIN), which includes 32 research institutes around the world, is a network of research and expertise to fight against infectious diseases. A scientometric approach was applied to describe research and collaboration activities of IPIN. Methods: Publications were identified using a manual search of IPIN member addresses in Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) between 2006 and 2011. Total publications were then subcategorized by geographic regions. Several scientometric indicators and the H-index were employed to estimate the scientific production of each IPIN member. Subject and geographical overlay maps were also applied to visualize the network activities of the IPIN members. Results: A total number of 12667 publications originated from IPIN members. Each author produced an average number of 2.18 papers and each publication received an average of 13.40 citations. European Pasteur Institutes had the largest amount of publications, authored papers, and H-index values. Biochemistry and molecular biology, microbiology, immunology and infectious diseases were the most important research topics, respectively. Geographic mapping of IPIN publications showed wide international collaboration among IPIN members around the world. Conclusion: IPIN has strong ties with national and international authorities and organizations to investigate the current and future health issues. It is recommended to use scientometric and collaboration indicators as measures of research performance in IPIN future policies and investment decisions