|
on Sociology of Economics |
|
Issue of 2011‒02‒05
three papers chosen by Jonas Holmström Swedish School of Economics and Business Administration |
| By: | Chang, C-L.; McAleer, M.J.; Oxley, L. |
| Abstract: | The paper analyses the leading journals in Neurosciences using quantifiable Research Assessment Measures (RAM), highlights the similarities and differences in alternative RAM, shows that several RAM capture similar performance characteristics of highly cited journals, and shows that some other RAM have low correlations with each other, and hence add significant informational value. Alternative RAM are discussed for the Thomson Reuters ISI Web of Science database (hereafter ISI). The RAM that are calculated annually or updated daily include the classic 2-year impact factor (2YIF), 5-year impact factor (5YIF), Immediacy (or zero-year impact factor (0YIF)), Eigenfactor score, Article Influence score, C3PO (Citation Performance Per Paper Online), h-index, Zinfluence, PI-BETA (Papers Ignored - By Even The Authors), 2-year and historical Self-citation Threshold Approval Ratings (STAR), Impact Factor Inflation (IFI), and Cited Article Influence (CAI). The RAM are analysed for 26 highly cited journals in the ISI category of Neurosciences. The paper finds that the Eigenfactor score and PI-BETA are not highly correlated with the other RAM scores, so that they convey additional information regarding journal rankings, that Article Influence is highly correlated with some existing RAM, so that it has little informative incremental value, and that CAI has additional informational value to that of Article Influence. Harmonic mean rankings of the 13 RAM criteria for the 26 highly cited journals are also presented. Emphasizing the 2-year impact factor of a journal to the exclusion of other informative RAM criteria is shown to lead to a distorted evaluation of journal performance and influence, especially given the informative value of several other RAM. |
| Keywords: | impact factor;prestige;immediacy;eigenfactor;article Influence;h-index;C3PO;zinfluence;PI-BETA;STAR;IFI;cited article influence |
| Date: | 2011–01–25 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:dgr:eureir:1765022236&r=sog |
| By: | Tol, Richard S. J. |
| Abstract: | Performance measures of individual scholars tend to ignore the context. I introduce contextualised metrics: cardinal and ordinal pseudo-Shapley values that measure a scholar's contribution to (perhaps power over) her own school and her market value to other schools should she change job. I illustrate the proposed measures with business scholars and business schools in Ireland. Although conceptually superior, the power indicators imply a ranking of scholars within a school that is identical to the corresponding conventional performance measures. The market value indicators imply an identical ranking within schools and a very similar ranking between schools. The ordinal indices further contextualise performance measures and thus deviate further from the corresponding conventional indicators. As the ordinal measures are discontinuous by construction, a natural classification of scholars emerges. Averaged over schools, the market values offer little extra information over the corresponding production and impact measures. The ordinal power measure indicates the robustness or fragility of an institution's place in the rank order. It is only weakly correlated with the concentration of publications and citations. |
| Keywords: | departments/Individuals/Rankings/Ireland |
| Date: | 2011–01 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:esr:wpaper:wp370&r=sog |
| By: | Hottenrott, Hanna; Thorwarth, Susanne |
| Abstract: | University research provides valuable inputs to industrial innovation. It is therefore not surprising that private sector firms increasingly seek direct access through funding public R&D. This development, however, spurred concerns about possible negative long-run effects on scientific performance. While previous research has mainly focused on a potential crowding-out of scientific publications through commercialization activities such as patenting or the formation of spin-off companies, we study the effects of direct funding from industry on professors' publication and patenting efforts. Our analysis of a sample of 678 professors at 46 higher education institutions in Germany shows that a higher share of industry funding of a professor's research budget results in a lower publication outcome both in terms of quantity and quality in subsequent years. For patents, we find that industry funding increases their quality measured by patent citations. -- |
| Keywords: | Scientist Productivity,University Research,Patents,Research Funding,Technology Transfer |
| JEL: | O31 O32 O33 |
| Date: | 2010 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:zewdip:10105&r=sog |