The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators
description
Transcript of The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators
![Page 1: The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062815/5681692f550346895de075c9/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
OST Workshop 12 May 2014, Paris
The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators
Paul Wouters, Sarah de Rijcke and Ludo Waltman, Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS)
![Page 2: The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062815/5681692f550346895de075c9/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
Debate so far
![Page 3: The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062815/5681692f550346895de075c9/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
“The variety of available bibliographic databases and the tempestuous development of both hardware and software have essentially contributed to the great rise of bibliometric research in the 80-s. In the last decade an increasing number of bibliometric studies was concerned with the evaluation of scientific research at the macro- and meso-level. Different database versions and a variety of applied methods and techniques have resulted sometimes in considerable deviations between the values of science indicators produced by different institutes”
Glänzel (1996): THE NEED FOR STANDARDS IN BIBLIOMETRIC RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY, Scientometrics, 35 (2), p. 167.
![Page 4: The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062815/5681692f550346895de075c9/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Applications citation analysisCitation analysis has four main applications:• Qualitative and quantitative evaluation of
scientists, publications, and scientific institutions• Reconstruction and modeling of the historical
development of science and technology• Information search and retrieval• Knowledge organization
![Page 5: The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062815/5681692f550346895de075c9/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Why standards?
• Bibliometrics increasingly used in research assessment• Data & indicators for assessment widely available • Some methods blackboxed in database-linked services (TR
as well as Elsevier)• No consensus in bibliometric community• Bewildering number of indicators and data options• Bibliometric knowledge base not easily accessible• Ethical and political responsibility distributed and cannot be
ignored
![Page 6: The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062815/5681692f550346895de075c9/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
State of affairs on standards• “End users” demand clarity about the best way to assess
quality and impact from bibliometric experts• Most bibliometric research focused on creating more
diversity rather than on pruning the tree of data and indicator options
• Bibliometric community has not yet a professional channel to organize its professional, ethical, and political responsibility
• We lack a code of conduct with respect to research evaluation although assessments may have strong implications for human careers and lives
![Page 7: The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062815/5681692f550346895de075c9/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Three types of standards
• Data standards• Indicator standards• Standards for good evaluation practices
![Page 8: The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062815/5681692f550346895de075c9/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Data standards
• Data standards:– Choice of data sources– Selection of documents from those sources– Data cleaning, citation matching and linking issues– Definition and delineation of fields and peer groups for
comparison
![Page 9: The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062815/5681692f550346895de075c9/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Indicator standards
• Indicator standards:– Choice of level of aggregation (nations; programs; institutes;
groups; principal investigators; individual researchers)– Choice of dimension to measure (size, activity, impact,
collaboration, quality, feasibility, specialization)– Transparency of construction– Visibility of uncertainty and of sources of error– Specific technical issues:
• Size: fractionalization; weighting• Impact: averages vs percentiles; field normalization; citation
window
![Page 10: The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062815/5681692f550346895de075c9/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Standards for GEP
• Standards for good evaluation practices:– When is it appropriate to use bibliometric data and methods?– The balance between bibliometrics, peer review, expert review,
and other assessment methodologies (eg Delphi)– The transparency of the assessment method (from beginning
to end)– The accountability of the assessors– The way attempts to manipulate bibliometric measures is
handled (citation cartels; journal self-citations)– Clarity about the responsibilities of researchers, assessors,
university managers, database providers, etc.
![Page 11: The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062815/5681692f550346895de075c9/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Preconference STI_ENID workshop 2 September 2014• Advantages and disadvantages of different types of bibliometric indicators,
Which types of indicators are to be preferred, and how does this depend on the purpose of a bibliometric analysis? Should multiple indicators be used in a complementary way?
• Advantages and disadvantages of different approaches to the field-normalization of bibliometric indicators, eg cited-side and citing-side approaches.
• The use of techniques for statistical inference, such as hypothesis tests and confidence intervals, to complement bibliometric indicators.
• Journal impact metrics. Which properties should a good journal impact metric have? To what extent do existing metrics (IF, Eigenfactor, SJR, SNIP) have these properties? Is there a need for new metrics? How can journal impact metrics be used in a proper way?
![Page 12: The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062815/5681692f550346895de075c9/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
An example of a problem in standards for assessment
![Page 13: The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062815/5681692f550346895de075c9/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Example: individual level bibliometrics• Involves all three forms of standardization• Not in the first place a technical problem, but
does have many technical aspects• Glaenzel & Wouters (2013) presented 10 dos and
don’ts of individual level bibliometrics• Moed (2013) presented a matrix/portfolio
approach• ACUMEN (2014) presented the design of a Web
based research portfolio
![Page 14: The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062815/5681692f550346895de075c9/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
aim is to give researchers a voice in evaluation
➡evidence based arguments➡shift to dialog orientation➡selection of indicators➡narrative component➡Good Evaluation Practices➡envisioned as web service
portfolio
expertise
output
influencenarrative
![Page 15: The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062815/5681692f550346895de075c9/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
ACUMEN Portfolio
Career NarrativeLinks expertise, output, and influence together in an evidence-based argument; included content is negotiated with evaluator and tailored to the particular evaluation
Output- publications- public media- teaching- web/social media- data sets- software/tools- infrastructure- grant proposals
Expertise- scientific/scholarly- technological- communication- organizational- knowledge transfer- educational
Influence- on science
- on society
- on economy
- on teaching
Evaluation Guidelines - aimed at both researchers and evaluators- development of evidence based arguments
(what counts as evidence?)- expanded list of research output- establishing provenance- taxonomy of indicators: bibliometric,
webometric, altmetric- guidance on use of indicators- contextual considerations, such as: stage of
career, discipline, and country of residence
Tatum & Wouters | 14 November 2013
![Page 16: The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062815/5681692f550346895de075c9/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Portfolio & Guidelines
➡ Instrument for empowering researchers in the processes of evaluation
➡ Taking in to consideration all academic disciplines
➡ Suitable for other uses (e.g. career planning)
➡ Able to integrate into different evaluation systems
Tatum & Wouters | 14 November 2013
![Page 17: The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062815/5681692f550346895de075c9/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
What type of standardization process do we need?
![Page 18: The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062815/5681692f550346895de075c9/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Evaluation Machines
• Primary function: make stuff auditable• Mechanization of control – degradation of work
and trust? (performance paradox)• Risks for evaluand and defensive responses• What are their costs, direct and indirect?• Microquality versus macroquality – lock-in• Goal displacement & strategic behaviour
![Page 19: The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062815/5681692f550346895de075c9/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Citation as infrastructure
• Infrastructures are not constructed but evolve• Transparent structures taken for granted• Supported by invisible work• They embody technical and social standards• Citation network includes databases, centres,
publishers, guidelines
![Page 20: The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062815/5681692f550346895de075c9/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Effects of indicators
• Intended effect: behavioural change• Unintended effects:– Goal displacement– Structural changes
• The big unknown: effects on knowledge?• Institutional rearrangements• Does quality go up or down?
![Page 21: The debate on uses and consequences of STI indicators](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062815/5681692f550346895de075c9/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Constitutive effects
• Limitations of conventional critiques (eg ‘perverse or unintended effects’)
• Effects:• Interpretative frames• Content & priorities• Social identities & relations (labelling)• Spread over time and levels
• Not a deterministic process• Democratic role of evaluations