Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

0.011702998 = product of:
  0.04681199 = sum of:
    0.04681199 = product of:
      0.07021798 = sum of:
        0.034596376 = weight(_text_:science in 348) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034596376 = score(doc=348,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.30244917 = fieldWeight in 348, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=348)
        0.03562161 = weight(_text_:29 in 348) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03562161 = score(doc=348,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15275662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 348, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=348)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

29. 5.2007 12:50:08

LCSH

Science / Abstracting and indexing

Subject

Science / Abstracting and indexing

0.0078019984 = product of:
  0.031207994 = sum of:
    0.031207994 = product of:
      0.04681199 = sum of:
        0.02306425 = weight(_text_:science in 3026) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02306425 = score(doc=3026,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.20163277 = fieldWeight in 3026, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3026)
        0.023747738 = weight(_text_:29 in 3026) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023747738 = score(doc=3026,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15275662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.15546128 = fieldWeight in 3026, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3026)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Inhalt: Scholars and scripts, spoors and scores / Blaise CroninHistory and evolution of (biblio)metrics / Nicola De Bellis -- The citation : from culture to infrastructure / Paul Wouters -- The data it is me! / Ronald E. Day -- The ethics of evaluative bibliometrics / Jonathan Furner -- Criteria for evaluating indicators / Yves Gingras -- Obliteration by incorporation / Katherine W. McCain -- A network approach to scholarly evaluation / Jevin D. West and Daril A. Vilhena -- Science visualization and discursive knowledge / Loet Leydesdorff -- Measuring interdisciplinarity / Vincent Larivière and Yves Gingras -- Bibliometric standards for evaluating research institutes in the natural sciences / Lutz Bornmann, Benjamin E. Bowman, Jonathan Bauer, Werner Marx, Hermann Schier and Margit Palzenberger -- Identifying and quantifying research strengths using market segmentation / Kevin W. Boyack and Richard Klavans -- Finding and recommending scholarly articles / Michael J. Kurtz and Edwin A. Henneken -- Altmetrics / Jason Priem -- Web impact measures for research assessment / Kayvan Kousha and Mike Thelwall -- Bibliographic references in Web 2.0 / Judit Bar-Illan, Hadas Shema and Mike Thelwall -- Readership metrics / Stefanie Haustein -- Evaluating the work of judges / Peter Hook -- Academic genealogy / Cassidy R. Sugimoto -- A publishing perspective on bibliometrics / Judith Kamalski, Andrew Plume and Mayur Amin -- Science metrics and science policy / Julia Lane, Mark Largent and Rebecca Rosen.

Date

14. 6.2016 13:29:14

0.0022193585 = product of:
  0.008877434 = sum of:
    0.008877434 = product of:
      0.0266323 = sum of:
        0.0266323 = weight(_text_:science in 102) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0266323 = score(doc=102,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.23282544 = fieldWeight in 102, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=102)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

LCSH

Library science / Vocational guidance
Information science / Vocational guidance

Subject

Library science / Vocational guidance
Information science / Vocational guidance

0.0015693232 = product of:
  0.006277293 = sum of:
    0.006277293 = product of:
      0.018831879 = sum of:
        0.018831879 = weight(_text_:science in 3805) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018831879 = score(doc=3805,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.16463245 = fieldWeight in 3805, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3805)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The research evaluation market is booming. "Ranking," "metrics," "h-index," and "impact factors" are reigning buzzwords. Government and research administrators want to evaluate everything -- teachers, professors, training programs, universities -- using quantitative indicators. Among the tools used to measure "research excellence," bibliometrics -- aggregate data on publications and citations -- has become dominant. Bibliometrics is hailed as an "objective" measure of research quality, a quantitative measure more useful than "subjective" and intuitive evaluation methods such as peer review that have been used since scientific papers were first published in the seventeenth century. In this book, Yves Gingras offers a spirited argument against an unquestioning reliance on bibliometrics as an indicator of research quality. Gingras shows that bibliometric rankings have no real scientific validity, rarely measuring what they pretend to. Although the study of publication and citation patterns, at the proper scales, can yield insights on the global dynamics of science over time, ill-defined quantitative indicators often generate perverse and unintended effects on the direction of research. Moreover, abuse of bibliometrics occurs when data is manipulated to boost rankings. Gingras looks at the politics of evaluation and argues that using numbers can be a way to control scientists and diminish their autonomy in the evaluation process. Proposing precise criteria for establishing the validity of indicators at a given scale of analysis, Gingras questions why universities are so eager to let invalid indicators influence their research strategy.

Series

History and foundations of information science