Browman Howard I. & Stergiou Konstantinos I. (2008). Â« The use and misuse of bibliometric indices in evaluating scholarly performance : Esep Theme Section Â». Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, vol. 8, nÂ° 1, juin. En ligne : <http://www.int-res.com/abstracts/esep/v8/n1/>.
Added by: orey (08 Jan 2009 11:41:46 Europe/Paris) Last edited by: orey (07 Jul 2009 17:06:45 Europe/Paris)
|Resource type: Journal Article
BibTeX citation key: Browman2008
Creators: Browman, Stergiou
Collection: Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics
Views index: 23%
Popularity index: 5.75%
|URLs http://www.int-res ... tracts/esep/v8/n1/|
Quantifying the relative performance of individual scholars, groups of scholars, departments, institutions, provinces/states/regions and countries has become an integral part of decision-making over research policy, funding allocations, awarding of grants, faculty hirings, and claims for promotion and tenure. Bibliometric indices (based mainly upon citation counts), such as the h-index and the journal impact factor (JIF), are heavily relied upon in such assessments. There is a growing consensus, and a deep concern, that these indicesâ€”more and more often used as a replacement for the informed judgement of peersâ€”are misunderstood and are, therefore, often misinterpreted and misused. Although much has been written about the JIF, some combination of its biases and limitations will be true of any citation-based metric. While it is not our contention that bibliometric indices have no value, they should not be applied as performance metrics without a thorough and insightful understanding of their (few?) strengths and (many?) weaknesses. We hope that the articles in this Theme Section will motivate readers to more seriously study the nature of the metrics that are being used to assess them and to consider what their overuse, and misuse, means to us and to future generations of scholars.
Added by: orey Last edited by: orey