Reframing the Debate on Quality vs Quantity in Research Assessment

IF 0.6 Q3 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Jiban K. Pal
{"title":"Reframing the Debate on Quality vs Quantity in Research Assessment","authors":"Jiban K. Pal","doi":"10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16682","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The debate on quality versus quantity is still persistent for methodological considerations. These two approaches are highly contrasting in their epistemology and contrary to each other. A single composite indicator that reasonably senses both quality and quantity would be significant toward performance. This paper evaluates the potency of the combined metric for quality assessment of publications (QP) in India’s National Institutional Research Framework (NIRF) exercise in 2020. It also suggests a potential improvement in quality measurement to obtain the rankings more rationally with finer tunings.","PeriodicalId":44921,"journal":{"name":"DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16682","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The debate on quality versus quantity is still persistent for methodological considerations. These two approaches are highly contrasting in their epistemology and contrary to each other. A single composite indicator that reasonably senses both quality and quantity would be significant toward performance. This paper evaluates the potency of the combined metric for quality assessment of publications (QP) in India’s National Institutional Research Framework (NIRF) exercise in 2020. It also suggests a potential improvement in quality measurement to obtain the rankings more rationally with finer tunings.
重议科研评估中的质与量之争
关于质量和数量的争论仍然是方法论上的考虑。这两种方法在认识论上是高度对立的,是相互对立的。合理地感知质量和数量的单一复合指标将对性能具有重要意义。本文评估了2020年印度国家机构研究框架(NIRF)活动中出版物质量评估(QP)的综合指标的效力。它还建议在质量测量方面进行潜在的改进,以便通过更精细的调整更合理地获得排名。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology
DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
11.10%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology publishes original research and review papers related to library science and IT applied to library activities, services, and products. Major subject fields covered include: Information systems, Knowledge management, Collection building & management, Information behaviour & retrieval, Librarianship/library management, Library & information services, Records management & preservation, etc.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信