Allocative efficiency in public research funding:can bibliometrics help?
arXiv:1812.07842 · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2008.11.001
Abstract
The use of outcome control modes of research evaluation exercises is ever more frequent. They are conceived as tools to stimulate increased levels of research productivity, and to guide choices in allocating components of government research budgets for publicly funded institutions. There are several contributions in the literature that compare the different methodological approaches that policy makers could adopt for these exercises, however the comparisons are limited to only a few disciplines. This work, examining the case of the whole of the "hard sciences" of the Italian academic system, makes a comparison between results obtained from peer review type of evaluations (as adopted by the Ministry of Universities and Research) and those possible from a bibliometric approach (as developed by the authors). The aim is to understand to what extent bibliometric methodology, which is noted as relatively inexpensive, time-saving and exhaustive, can complement and integrate peer review methodology in research evaluation.
References in corpus (1)
Cited by in corpus (25)
- Evaluating research: from informed peer review to bibliometrics
- University-industry collaboration in Italy: a bibliometric examination
- A heuristic approach to author name disambiguation in bibliometrics databases for large-scale research assessments
- National research assessment exercises: a comparison of peer review and bibliometrics rankings
- A field-standardized application of DEA to national-scale research assessment of universities
- Do they agree? Bibliometric evaluation vs informed peer review in the Italian research assessment exercise
- The VQR, Italy's second national research assessment: Methodological failures and ranking distortions
- Reviewers' ratings and bibliometric indicators: hand in hand when assessing over research proposals?
- Revisiting size effects in higher education research productivity
- The dispersion of research performance within and between universities as a potential indicator of the competitive intensity in higher education systems
- Testing the trade-off between productivity and quality in research activities
- Refrain from adopting the combination of citation and journal metrics to grade publications, as used in the Italian national research assessment exercise (VQR 2011-2014)
- A sensitivity analysis of researchers' productivity rankings to the time of citation observation
- National research assessment exercises: the effects of changing the rules of the game during the game
- Diversification versus specialization in scientific research: which strategy pays off?
- Assessing the accuracy of the h and g indexes for measuring researchers' productivity
- Inefficiency in selecting products for submission to national research assessment exercises
- On tit for tat: Franceschini and Maisano versus ANVUR regarding the Italian research assessment exercise VQR 2011-2014
- Open data to evaluate academic researchers: an experiment with the Italian Scientific Habilitation
- Tracing the evolution of physics with a keyword co-occurrence network
- National research assessment exercises: a measure of the distortion of performance rankings when labor input is treated as uniform
- Metrics to evaluate research performance in academic institutions: A critique of ERA 2010 as applied in forestry and the indirect H2 index as a possible alternative
- Peer review research assessment: a sensitivity analysis of performance rankings to the share of research product evaluated
- A Decision Support System for Public Research Organizations Participating in National Research Assessment Exercises
- Can we assess research using open scientific knowledge graphs? A case study within the Italian National Scientific Qualification