| 1. |
-
23rd Nordic Workshop on Bibliometrics and Research Policy 2018 Book of abstracts
- 2018
-
Proceedings (redaktörskap) (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Initiated by Professors Olle Persson and Peter Ingwersen, bibliometric researchers in the Nordic countries have arranged annual Nordic workshops on bibliometrics since 1996. The general scope of the Nordic Workshop on Bibliometrics and Research Policy is to present recent bibliometric research in the Nordic countries, to create better linkages between the bibliometric research groups and their PhD students, and to link bibliometric research with research policy.The workshop language is English and the workshop is open to participants from any nation. The 23rd Nordic Workshop on Bibliometrics and Research Policy (NWB’2018) was organized by the Swedish School of Library and Information Science (SSLIS) at University of Borås, Sweden. It was held at University of Borås, on November 7-9th, 2018 with 100 participants.In total, we received 35 submissions. After reviewing the submissions, the program committee decided which papers were to be presented orally and which as poster presentations. 21 papers were accepted as oral presentations. These, as well as the titles of the two invited keynote talks and the abstracts of 9 posters, are presented as abstracts in these proceedings. The posters and oral presentation slides are also available for viewing and peer-feedback at figshare (with citable DOIs):https://doi.orgWe would like to thank all authors for their submissions, the session chairs and the keynote speakers, Fredrik Åström and Merle Jacob, for their contributions to the workshop and the student volunteers, for their diligent efforts during the workshop. Further, we would like to thank the sponsors for their generous financial support, without which the Nordic workshops could not be organised in their current form.The NWB’2017 website is at https://hb.se/nwb2018Follow on twitter as @nwb_2018 and #nwb2018
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- de Rijcke, Sarah, et al.
(författare)
-
Evaluation practices and effects of indicator use : a literature review
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Research Evaluation. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0958-2029 .- 1471-5449. ; 25:2, s. 1-9
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This review of the international literature on evaluation systems, evaluation practices, and metrics (mis)uses was written as part of a larger review commissioned by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) to inform their independent assessment of the role of metrics in research evaluation (2014–5). The literature on evaluation systems, practices, and effects of indicator uses is extremely heterogeneous: it comprises hundreds of sources published in different media, spread over disciplines, and with considerable variation in the nature of the evidence. A condensation of the state-of-the-art in relevant research is therefore highly timely. Our reviewpresents the main strands in the literature, with a focus on empirical materials about possible effects of evaluation exercises, ‘gaming’ of indicators, and strategic responses by scientific communities and others to requirements in research assessments. In order to increase visibility and availability, an adapted and updated review is presented here as a stand-alone—after authorizationby HEFCE.
|
|
| 4. |
- Haddow, Gabrielle, et al.
(författare)
-
Early career academics and evaluative metrics: : ambivalence, resistance and strategies
- 2019
-
Ingår i: The Social Structures of Global Academia. - Abingdon, Oxon : Routledge. - 9781138610125 ; , s. 125-143
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Measures of research productivity and quality are key components of academic life, and a successful academic career is heavily dependent on meeting quantified performance standards. For many years citation-based measures like the Impact Factor dominated the metrics landscape, but in the last two decades a swathe of new evaluation tools have emerged, including the h-index, ranked journal lists, and altmetrics. While the effectiveness of these metrics is debatable across many disciplines, their use in the social sciences and humanities has attracted most criticism. This chapter is concerned with how early career academics are using and responding to evaluative metrics; their strategies and ambitions for the future, and their perceptions of how evaluative metrics influence their work. In-depth interviews with Australian academics in the social sciences and humanities allowed us to explore these questions and we are particularly interested in how competing ‘orders of worth’ come to the fore in these accounts, and how researchers negotiate rivalling demands and expectations. Drawing on Brandtner’s concept of ‘evaluative landscapes’, we suggest that metrics and indicators can be seen as signposts which are used to assess achievement and to navigate a pathway to an ‘idealised sense of self’.
|
|
| 5. |
- Haddow, Gaby, et al.
(författare)
-
Quality, impact, and quantification : Indicators and metrics use by social scientists
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 2330-1635 .- 2330-1643. ; 70:1, s. 16-26
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The use of indicators and metrics for research evaluation purposes is well‐documented; however, less is known about their use by individual scholars. With a focus on the social sciences, this article contributes to the existing literature on indicators and metrics use in fields with diverse publication practices. Scholars in Australia and Sweden were asked about their use and reasons for using metrics. A total of 581 completed surveys were analyzed to generate descriptive statistics, with textual analysis performed on comments provided to open questions. While just under half of the participant group had used metrics, the Australians reported use in twice the proportion of their Swedish peers. Institutional policies and processes were frequently associated with use, and the scholars' comments suggest a high level of awareness of some metrics as well as strategic behavior in demonstrating research performance. There is also evidence of tensions between scholars' research evaluation environment and their disciplinary values and publication practices.
|
|
| 6. |
- Hammarfelt, Björn, et al.
(författare)
-
Accountability in context : Effects of research evaluation systems on publication practices, disciplinary norms and individual working routines in the faculty of Arts at Uppsala University
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Research Evaluation. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0958-2029 .- 1471-5449. ; 24:1, s. 63-77
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Given the increased role of bibliometric measures in research evaluation, it is striking that studies of actual changes in research practice are rare. Most studies and comments on ’a metric culture’ in academia focus on the ideological and political level, and there is a clear shortage of empirical studies that analyze how researchers handle demands for accountability in context. In adopting a mixed methods approach involving both bibliometric data and answers form questionnaires we provide an in-depth study of how researchers at the faculty of Arts at Uppsala University (Sweden) respond to the implementation of performance based research evaluation systems. Publication patterns from 2006-2013 show that journal publications, especially English-language ones, is increasing, and the proportion of peer-reviewed publications has doubled. These changes are in line with the incentives of the evaluation systems under study. Answers to the survey confirm that scholars are conscious about this development and several respondents articulate a disagreement between disciplinary norms and external demands. However, disciplinary background as well as career stage or academic age appears to have a significant influence on how individual researchers react to the instigation of evaluation systems. Finally, responses to national and local evaluation regimes are complex, localized and dependent on many factors. In-depth contextualized studies of research practices are needed in order to understand how performance based funding systems influence academic research on the ground.
|
|
| 7. |
- Hammarfelt, Björn
(författare)
-
Beyond coverage : Toward a bibliometrics for the humanities
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Research Assessment in the humanities. - Cham : Springer. ; , s. 115-131
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In this chapter, the possibility of using bibliometric measures forevaluating research in the humanities is pondered. A review of recent attempts todevelop bibliometric methods for studying the humanities shows that organizational,epistemological differences as well as distinct research practices in research fieldsought to be considered. The dependence on colleagues, interdisciplinarity and the‘rural’ nature of research in many humanistic disciplines are identified as factorsthat influence the possibilities of applying bibliometric methods. A few particularlypromising approaches are highlighted, and the possibility of developing a ‘bibliometricsfor the humanities’ is examined. Finally, the intellectual characteristics ofspecific disciplines should be considered when quality indicators are constructed, andthe importance of including scholars from the humanities in the process is stressed.
|
|
| 8. |
- Hammarfelt, Björn, 1980-, et al.
(författare)
-
Conflicting Measures and Values : How Humanities Scholars in Australia and Sweden Use and React to Bibliometric Indicators
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. - : Wiley. - 2330-1635 .- 2330-1643. ; 69:7, s. 924-935
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- While bibliometric indicators, such as the journal impact factor, have long played an important role in many STEM disciplines it has been repeatedly shown that established bibliometric methods have limited use in the humanities. Using a questionnaire on metrics use and publication practices in Australia and Sweden, we tested the assumption that indicators play a minor role among humanities scholars. Our findings show that our respondents use indicators to a considerable degree, with a range of indicators and rankings being employed. The scholars use metrics as part of institutional policy, in CVs and applications, as well as for general promotion of their work. Notable in our results is that a much larger share of researchers (62%) in Australia used metrics compared to Sweden (14%). Scholar’s attitudes regarding bibliometrics are mixed; many are critical of these measures, while at the same time feeling pressured to use them. One main tension described by our respondents is between intradisciplinary criteria of quality and formalized indicators, and negotiating these “orders of worth” is a challenging balancing act, especially for younger researchers.
|
|
| 9. |
- Hammarfelt, Björn
(författare)
-
Discipline
- 2019
-
Ingår i: ISKO Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization.
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Discipline is commonly used to denote particular areas of knowledge, research and education. Yet, the concept is often not very well defined or even explicitly discussed when used in knowledge organization and related fields. The aim of this article is to encourage and facilitate further reflections on academic disciplines, while at the same time offering insights on how this elusive concept might be understood. An overarching argument is that discipline should foremost be understood in relation to institutional and organizational features and this is what distinguishes it from related terms such as, field, domain or topic. The paper reviews the etymology and history of the concept, it discusses attempts to define and conceptualise disciplines and it offers insights on how disciplines can be studied. Regardless of our views of disciplines, either as inherently out-dated constructs or as important features of a well-functioning academia, it is concluded that further precision or care in explicating the concept is needed.
|
|
| 10. |
- Hammarfelt, Björn, 1980-
(författare)
-
Four Claims on Research Assessment and Metric Use in the Humanities
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. - 1931-6550 .- 1550-8366. ; 43:5, s. 33-38
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Bibliometric evaluation for research in the field of sciences can be a good way toassess the quality and factual basis of claims and can lead to more funding forauthors and for research work. However, due to the more diverse fields covered, thistype of evaluation is less effective in the world of humanities. Many professionalsand researchers in humanities fields believe that bibliometric evaluation is meantonly for STEM research and can’t properly assess any findings made in humanities.Four common claims made about bibliometrics in humanities are that bibliometricsdo not adequately cover the non-uniform nature of humanities; greater bibliometriccoverage will not solve all the research problems in humanities subjects; metrics usealready has an impact on humanities research practices and finally; other evaluationmethods, like altmetrics, are conventional.
|
|
