Qualitative conditions of scientometrics: the new challenges'

While scientometrics is now an established field, there are challenges. A closer look at how scientometricians aggregate building blocks into artfully made products, and point-represent these (e.g. as the map of field X) allows one to overcome the dependence on judgements of scientists for validation, and replace or complement these with intrinsic validation, based on quality checks of the several steps. Such quality checks require qualitative analysis of the domains being studied. Qualitative analysis is also necessary when noninstitutionalized domains and/or domains which do not emphasize texts are to be studied. A further challenge is to reflect on the effects of scientometrics on the development of science; indicators could lead to `induced¿ aggregation. The availability of scientometric tools and insights might allow scientists and science to become more reflexive

An empirical review of the different variants of the Probabilistic Affinity Index as applied to scientific collaboration

Responsible indicators are crucial for research assessment and monitoring. Transparency and accuracy of indicators are required to make research assessment fair and ensure reproducibility. However, sometimes it is difficult to conduct or replicate studies based on indicators due to the lack of transparency in conceptualization and operationalization. In this paper, we review the different variants of the Probabilistic Affinity Index (PAI), considering both the conceptual and empirical underpinnings. We begin with a review of the historical development of the indicator and the different alternatives proposed. To demonstrate the utility of the indicator, we demonstrate the application of PAI to identifying preferred partners in scientific collaboration. A streamlined procedure is provided, to demonstrate the variations and appropriate calculations. We then compare the results of implementation for five specific countries involved in international scientific collaboration. Despite the different proposals on its calculation, we do not observe large differences between the PAI variants, particularly with respect to country size. As with any indicator, the selection of a particular variant is dependent on the research question. To facilitate appropriate use, we provide recommendations for the use of the indicator given specific contexts.Comment: 35 pages, 3 figures, 5 table

Emergence of sociology in translation studies

Disciplinary awareness and understanding of various patterns and factors of emergence for ideas, consolidation and the diffusion of ideas and knowledge are as crucial in modern academic fields as in the wider context of a highly globalised and digitalised world. They ensure academic rigour and sustainable and effective development of scholarship. As a field that has at its very core the communication and procurement of ideas across linguistic and cultural boundaries, the discipline of Translation Studies is situated at a nexus of decoding, encoding, and facilitating the spread of ideas, thereby introducing new ideas to other disciplinary, linguistic or cultural contexts. The sociology of translation and of the translator, as the figure at the heart of this transmission process for ideas, have become prominent focal points for recent research in Translation Studies with scholarly activities largely focusing on linguistic, cultural, textual, or professional challenges related to the work of translators, scribes and language mediators. The aspect and role of epistemic structures, patterns for the emergence of ideas, and the differentiated positions of scholarly communities in the manifold process of the emergence and diffusion of ideas in the discipline of Translation Studies have so far received less attention though. This thesis investigates how ideas emerge and are transmitted into and across the discipline of Translation Studies. It considers different pathways and points of entry for new ideas that are transported across not just linguistic or cultural but also disciplinary boundaries, explores epistemic structures and processes, characteristics such as citation chains, and the rise and development of ideas in the field. Particular emphasis has been given to the topic of sociology as an area of interest for a number of pathways of recent research in Translation Studies, including for instance the concepts of agency, habitus, or narratology. The thesis explores a kaleidoscope of linguistic, publication, theoretical, and ideational factors contributing and influencing the emergence of ideas in general, in translation and Translation Studies especially, and investigates the field of sociology as an emerging idea in Translation Studies over the course of the last approximately 50 years. By contextualising this study within a wider framework of the history of ideas and by drawing on perspectives from different approaches to the emergence of innovative or new ideas and the growth of knowledge theories, the inclusion of aspects such as publication language and platform, issues of language hegemony, geographical bearings and ideational correlations further contribute to the complex picture. In order to examine the emergence of sociologically inspired and influenced approaches in Translation Studies research output, this study draws on the collation and analysis of a corpus of annotated academic publication data, including monographs and edited volumes, from the TSB database. Furthermore, this study also considers bibliographic data on monographs, as well as a survey of a number of handbooks and encyclopaedia on the field of Translation Studies. It proposes a bibliometric approach for the analysis of keywords in the collated data in order to identify indicators of a conscious employment of or engagement with ideas, theories, or methods from the field of sociology as well as their respective emergence patterns and points of entry. The evaluation of the collated bibliographic data and complementary strands of analysis indicates that the emergence of sociology in Translation Studies over the course of the last approximately 50 years examined presents as overall strongly exponential, with a high tendency for diversification, and generally de-centralised, although the discourse appears to be shaped by limited geographical and linguistic areas of input for sociological theories in TS. Going forward, the investigation thus suggests an exigency to continue engagement with ideational entry points and features of the emergence of interdisciplinary ideas, and to continue investigations into epistemic structures on a discipline wide level in Translation Studies as a useful tool to reflect on disciplinary habits and to further consolidate cross- disciplinary approaches in theory and practice

The Efficacy and Maturity of Quality Improvement Approaches in the New Zealand Healthcare System

Purpose The purpose of this research is to critically evaluate the quality improvement (QI) phenomenon in healthcare providing organisations (clinics, hospitals, etc.) and propose an agenda for system-wide continuous improvement for their care delivery processes, using New Zealand’s healthcare sector as a case study. Design/methodology/approach A systematic literature review (SLR) highlighted multiple gaps regarding quality improvement methodologies and the scope of their implementation in healthcare providing organisations across the world. Based on the SLR, a quality improvement maturity model was developed and used to analyse the use of QI methodologies and their scope of implementation within the District Health Boards (DHBs) operating in the New Zealand. In-depth interviews with quality improvement managers from 15 DHBs were conducted. In addition to the interviews, internal documents and operational data detailing the quality improvement activities and initiatives undertaken by DHBs were analysed using qualitative methods. This provided basis for a sector-wide analysis of QI implementation in New Zealand DHBs. Findings While healthcare providing organisations strongly portray inclination towards different quality improvement methodologies, their overall understanding and use of quality tools is very similar to each other. This inclination towards different QI methodologies is primarily based on the personal preferences of quality improvement managers, who are assigned with leading, supporting and managing quality improvement activities. Similarly, the majority of the proposed benefits and criticisms of different methodologies are based on their origin from outside of the healthcare sector. Second, the quality improvement managers and their teams are rarely given the appropriate authority and resources to fully offer change, i.e., manpower, power, influence and commitment from staff and senior leadership towards quality improvement. Finally, the scope of quality improvement in healthcare tends to be narrow and siloed—within singular value-streams or wards—and the concept and benefit of linking internal and external supply chains with quality improvement activities is missing in the care delivery processes. Research limitations This research is located within the New Zealand healthcare system. While, the healthcare delivery processes are largely similar to Australia and the UK, there can still be many inbuilt cultural and policy-related features that may limit the research findings to the New Zealand’s healthcare context. Research implications This research findings highlight a need to move forward from obtuse discussions about seeking the best quality improvement methods in healthcare sector. Selection of a specific QI methodology does not guarantee success or failure of QI initiatives. Instead, healthcare providing organisations need to realise the true meaning of QI, its principles, and implement them in their wider supply networks, to remove operational waste and increase value for the end-users – the patients, each and every one of us. Originality/value QI phenomenon in the healthcare sector is less mature compared to the manufacturing industries. Partly because, the institutional logics of healthcare environment are not aligned with the institutional logics associated with quality improvement. This mismatch arises from multiple factors, ranging from simple misunderstandings regarding quality improvement methods to the use of inappropriate jargon and complications in conducting QI work, which has created resistance in the healthcare workforce. However, pressure from government and public, healthcare organisations and their employees perform quality improvement initiatives that are narrow in scope and the implementation of quality tools and techniques. This narrow focus was observed not only in singular interviews, but also in the maturity analysis of participating District Health Boards