Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Why an Unbiased External R&D Evaluation System is Important for the Progress of Social Sciences—the Case of a Small Social Science Community


Author Info

  • Franc Mali

    (Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana, Kardeljeva pl. 5, Ljubljana 1000, Slovenia)

Registered author(s):


    This article deals with the impact of external R&D evaluations as one of the institutional factors that can encourage (or discourage) the progress of the social sciences. A critical overview is presented of the increasing use of bibliometric indicators in the external R&D evaluation procedures employed by the Slovenian Research Agency, which is the leading research council for financing the public sector of social sciences in Slovenia. We attempt to establish that, in order to ensure a good external R&D evaluation practice for a small social science community, it is insufficient to only have reliable bibliometric meta-databases. It is argued that it is equally important to formulate very precise criteria to ascertain their validity.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Article provided by MDPI, Open Access Journal in its journal Social Sciences.

    Volume (Year): 2 (2013)
    Issue (Month): 4 (December)
    Pages: 284-297

    as in new window
    Handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:2:y:2013:i:4:p:284-297:d:31000

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page:

    Related research

    Keywords: social sciences; external R&D evaluation; bibliometry; publication productivity; third-party funding; scientific impact;

    Find related papers by JEL classification:


    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Ulrich Schmoch & Torben Schubert & Dorothea Jansen & Richard Heidler & Regina von G�rtz, 2010. "How to use indicators to measure scientific performance: a balanced approach," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 2-18, March.
    2. Benedetto Lepori & Carole Probst, 2009. "Using curricula vitae for mapping scientific fields: a small-scale experience for Swiss communication sciences," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 125-134, June.
    3. Torres-Salinas, Daniel & Moed, Henk F., 2009. "Library Catalog Analysis as a tool in studies of social sciences and humanities: An exploratory study of published book titles in Economics," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 3(1), pages 9-26.
    4. Erik Ern�-Kj�lhede & Finn Hansson, 2011. "Measuring research performance during a changing relationship between science and society," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(2), pages 131-143, June.
    5. David Pontille & Didier Torny, 2010. "The controversial policies of journal ratings: evaluating social sciences and humanities," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(5), pages 347-360, December.
    6. Rémi Barré, 2010. "Towards socially robust S&T indicators: indicators as debatable devices, enabling collective learning," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(3), pages 227-231, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)



    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.


    Access and download statistics


    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:2:y:2013:i:4:p:284-297:d:31000. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (XML Conversion Team).

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.