Tag Archives: research evaluation

Google releases 2020 version of Scholar Metrics

(7 Jul 2020)  From Google Scholar Blog: “Scholar Metrics provide an easy way for authors to quickly gauge the visibility and influence of recent articles in scholarly publications. Today, we are releasing the 2020 version of Scholar Metrics. This release covers articles published in 2015–2019 and includes citations from all articles that were indexed in […]


Read More...


What’s wrong with the H-index, according to its inventor

(24 Mar 2020) Love it or hate it, the H-index has become one of the most widely used metrics in academia for measuring the productivity and impact of researchers. But when Jorge Hirsch proposed it as an objective measure of scientific achievement in 2005, he didn’t think it would be used outside theoretical physics. “I wasn’t even […]


Read More...


Chinese publishers react to new policies on research evaluation

(11 May 2020)  From Scholarly Kitchen: In February, the Chinese government released two documents that set forth important changes in policies governing science research evaluation. One of the most eye-catching changes is the requirement for researchers to publish one third of their representative papers in domestic Chinese journals, which is being hailed as a big boost for […]


Read More...


China shifts from reliance on international publications

(25 Feb 2020)  After years of pushing Chinese researchers to publish in prestigious international journals, China’s Ministry of Education and Ministry of Science and Technology have jointly released a document aimed at reducing “excessive reliance” on Science Citation Index (SCI) papers for academic promotions, job offers and allocation of research funding.   More related news […]


Read More...


Publish or perish? Faculty publishing decisions and the RPT process

(30 Jul 2019)  As tenured faculty positions become increasingly competitive, the pressure to publish—especially in “high impact” journals—has never been greater. As a result, many of today’s academics believe having a strong publication record is necessary for the review, promotion, and tenure (RPT) process. Publishing, for some, has become synonymous with professional success. A survey of faculty […]


Read More...


Elsevier announces the International Center for the Study of Research

(19 June 2019) A groundbreaking new Center tasked with examining and advancing the evaluation of research across all fields of knowledge production has been launched by Elsevier, the information analytics business specializing in science and health. The International Center for the Study of Research (ICSR) will work closely with the research community to review and develop the use of qualitative and […]


Read More...


Net ESolutions Corporation and Elsevier collaborate to improve information systems supporting research evaluation

(3 June 2019) Information analytics business Elsevier, and Netelabs, a research unit within Net ESolutions Corporation (NETE), have signed an agreement to partner in codeveloping new tools for research evaluation. Through the collaboration, data, digital design and product development from both organizations will be combined into larger and improved information systems supporting researchers, institutions, funders and policymakers. The driving […]


Read More...


The “impact” of the Journal Impact Factor in the review, tenure, and promotion process

(26 Apr 2019) The Journal Impact Factor (JIF) – a measure reflecting the average number of citations to recent articles published in a journal – has been widely critiqued as a measure of individual academic performance. However, it is unclear whether these criticisms and high profile declarations, such as DORA, have led to significant cultural […]


Read More...


Impact factors continue to influence academic evaluation, reveals a recent survey

(19 Apr 2019)  About half of the research focused institutions in the US and Canada still rely on journal impact factors to make promotion and tenure related decisions, revealed a recent survey based study published on PeerJ Preprints. The report provides insights into the usage of the impact factor, a metric whose suitability to judge the quality of research […]


Read More...


Australia releases first results of impact and engagement audit

(28 Mar 2019)  The first national assessment of Australian universities’ research impact and engagement activities has presented a mixed view of sector performance, and triggered further questions about the value of the exercise. The Engagement and Impact Assessment aimed to measure the impact that Australian university research had on everyday lives, industry and public services, […]


Read More...


Growing international collaboration not yet enough to halt decline in Japan’s research output

The Nature Index 2019 Japan supplement shows that global research performance in Japan continues to fall, but the number of international research partnerships is increasing (20 March 2019) Japan’s contribution to high-quality scientific research fell by 19.9 per cent between January 2012 and October 2018 according to the Nature Index. But efforts to increase international […]


Read More...


The hidden costs of research assessment exercises: the curious case of Australia

(13 March 2018) Research assessment exercises provide the government and wider public with assurance of the quality of university research, with the guiding principles being accountability, transparency, and openness. But is there the same accountability and openness when it comes to the public cost of these large-scale exercises? Ksenia Sawczak examines the situation in Australia […]


Read More...


Research evaluation and data science for libraries

(4 April 2017) EIFL, EIFL’s partner library consortium, Electronic Information for Libraries in Thailand, and Mahidol University, will host a two-day workshop on research evaluation and data science for libraries, 16-17 May 2017. The topics will be addressed in two sessions, over the two days: Research evaluation for research administrators/managers and librarians, covering research evaluation […]


Read More...