对匈牙利研究人员个人评估的拟议学术表现指标进行了批判性审查

IF 1.6 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
G. Csomós
{"title":"对匈牙利研究人员个人评估的拟议学术表现指标进行了批判性审查","authors":"G. Csomós","doi":"10.1080/09737766.2022.2106166","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The academic performance indicators of the Doctor of Science title, the highest and most prestigious qualification awarded by the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (HAS), are key in the national assessment system. The types of performance indicators, as well as their minimum values, are incorporated into the application requirements for academic promotions, scientific qualifications, and research scholarships. HAS has proposed a reform of these performance indicators, to align with the current national and global trends. The proposed modifications are generally based on arbitrary decisions and the consensus between academicians, namely, the representatives of the sections of HAS. This paper contains a bibliometric analysis of 25,000 publications produced between 2011 and 2020 by 683 researchers affiliated with HAS’s Section of Earth Sciences. The bibliometric data of the publications are processed by an integer and fractional counting, respectively. The main goal of the paper is to argue that discipline-specific co-authorship patterns should be accounted for in the assessment procedure. It is also shown that the homogenization of the performance indicators and the rigid use of the integer counting method favor hard natural science disciplines and put social science disciplines at a disadvantage. Finally, the paper describes some components of an alternative publishing strategy which would be most prudent for researchers, given the proposed assessment criteria.","PeriodicalId":10501,"journal":{"name":"COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management","volume":"16 1","pages":"331 - 352"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A critical review of the proposed academic performance indicators for the assessment of individual researchers in Hungary\",\"authors\":\"G. Csomós\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09737766.2022.2106166\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The academic performance indicators of the Doctor of Science title, the highest and most prestigious qualification awarded by the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (HAS), are key in the national assessment system. The types of performance indicators, as well as their minimum values, are incorporated into the application requirements for academic promotions, scientific qualifications, and research scholarships. HAS has proposed a reform of these performance indicators, to align with the current national and global trends. The proposed modifications are generally based on arbitrary decisions and the consensus between academicians, namely, the representatives of the sections of HAS. This paper contains a bibliometric analysis of 25,000 publications produced between 2011 and 2020 by 683 researchers affiliated with HAS’s Section of Earth Sciences. The bibliometric data of the publications are processed by an integer and fractional counting, respectively. The main goal of the paper is to argue that discipline-specific co-authorship patterns should be accounted for in the assessment procedure. It is also shown that the homogenization of the performance indicators and the rigid use of the integer counting method favor hard natural science disciplines and put social science disciplines at a disadvantage. Finally, the paper describes some components of an alternative publishing strategy which would be most prudent for researchers, given the proposed assessment criteria.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10501,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"331 - 352\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09737766.2022.2106166\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09737766.2022.2106166","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

科学博士头衔是匈牙利科学院授予的最高和最负盛名的资格,其学术表现指标是国家评估体系的关键。绩效指标的类型及其最低值已纳入学术晋升、科学资格和研究奖学金的申请要求。HAS建议对这些绩效指标进行改革,以符合当前的国家和全球趋势。拟议的修改通常基于武断的决定和院士之间的共识,即HAS各部门的代表。本文对隶属于HAS地球科学部的683名研究人员在2011年至2020年间出版的25000份出版物进行了文献计量分析。出版物的文献计量数据分别通过整数和分数计数进行处理。论文的主要目的是论证在评估程序中应考虑特定学科的合作模式。研究还表明,绩效指标的同质化和整数计数方法的僵化有利于硬自然科学学科,使社会科学学科处于劣势。最后,本文描述了根据拟议的评估标准,对研究人员来说最谨慎的替代出版策略的一些组成部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A critical review of the proposed academic performance indicators for the assessment of individual researchers in Hungary
The academic performance indicators of the Doctor of Science title, the highest and most prestigious qualification awarded by the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (HAS), are key in the national assessment system. The types of performance indicators, as well as their minimum values, are incorporated into the application requirements for academic promotions, scientific qualifications, and research scholarships. HAS has proposed a reform of these performance indicators, to align with the current national and global trends. The proposed modifications are generally based on arbitrary decisions and the consensus between academicians, namely, the representatives of the sections of HAS. This paper contains a bibliometric analysis of 25,000 publications produced between 2011 and 2020 by 683 researchers affiliated with HAS’s Section of Earth Sciences. The bibliometric data of the publications are processed by an integer and fractional counting, respectively. The main goal of the paper is to argue that discipline-specific co-authorship patterns should be accounted for in the assessment procedure. It is also shown that the homogenization of the performance indicators and the rigid use of the integer counting method favor hard natural science disciplines and put social science disciplines at a disadvantage. Finally, the paper describes some components of an alternative publishing strategy which would be most prudent for researchers, given the proposed assessment criteria.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management
COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
×
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