| By: |
L szl¢ A. K¢czy (Institute of Economics Research Centre for Economic and Regional Studies Hungarian Academy of Sciences);
Alexandru Nichifor (School of Economics and Finance, Castlecliffe, The Scores, University of St Andrews, UK) |
| Abstract: |
The evaluation of scientific output has a key role in the allocation of
research funds and academic positions. Decisions are often based on quality
indicators for academic journals and over the years a handful of scoring
methods have been proposed for this purpose. Discussing the most prominent
methods (de facto standards) we show that they do not distinguish quality from
quantity at article level. The systematic bias we find is analytically
tractable and implies that the methods are manipulable. We introduce modified
methods that correct for this bias, and use them to provide rankings of
economic journals. Our methodology is transparent; our results are replicable. |
| Keywords: |
Modified invariant method, Invariance to article-splitting, Influence of economic journals, Impact factor, LP method, Invariant method |
| JEL: |
A1 C8 D72 Y1 |
| Date: |
2012–03 |
| URL: |
http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:has:discpr:1215&r=sog |