IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v86y2011i1d10.1007_s11192-010-0222-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mimicry in science?

Author

Listed:
  • Lutz Bornmann

    (ETH Zurich)

Abstract

Since bibliometric indicators have obtained a general acceptance in science policy and attained applied relevance in research evaluation, feedback effects on scientists’ behaviour resulting from the use of these indicators for science funding decisions have been reported. These adaptation strategies could be called mimicry in science. Scientists apply strategies that should enable them to comply to bibliometric accountability and to secure funds to their own research.

Suggested Citation

  • Lutz Bornmann, 2011. "Mimicry in science?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(1), pages 173-177, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:86:y:2011:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-010-0222-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-010-0222-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-010-0222-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-010-0222-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Henk F. Moed, 2008. "UK Research Assessment Exercises: Informed judgments on research quality or quantity?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 74(1), pages 153-161, January.
    2. Peter A. Lawrence, 2003. "The politics of publication," Nature, Nature, vol. 422(6929), pages 259-261, March.
    3. Linda Butler, 2003. "Modifying publication practices in response to funding formulas," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(1), pages 39-46, April.
    4. Jane Qiu, 2010. "Publish or perish in China," Nature, Nature, vol. 463(7278), pages 142-142, January.
    5. Lutz Bornmann & Hans‐Dieter Daniel, 2007. "Multiple publication on a single research study: Does it pay? The influence of number of research articles on total citation counts in biomedicine," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 58(8), pages 1100-1107, June.
    6. Evaristo Jiménez-Contreras & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar & Rafael Ruiz-Pérez & Víctor M. Fernández, 2002. "Impact-factor rewards affect Spanish research," Nature, Nature, vol. 417(6892), pages 898-898, June.
    7. Peter Weingart, 2005. "Impact of bibliometrics upon the science system: Inadvertent consequences?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 62(1), pages 117-131, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fiorenzo Franceschini & Domenico Maisano, 2011. "Proposals for evaluating the regularity of a scientist’s research output," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(1), pages 279-295, July.
    2. Antonio Abatemarco & Roberto Dell'Anno, 2012. "Italian Reform of the academic recruitment system. An appraisal of ANVUR and CUN benchmarks for assessing candidates and commissioners," Rivista italiana degli economisti, Società editrice il Mulino, issue 3, pages 441-480.
    3. Carolin Michels & Ulrich Schmoch, 2014. "Impact of bibliometric studies on the publication behaviour of authors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 369-385, January.
    4. Fiorenzo Franceschini & Maurizio Galetto & Domenico Maisano & Luca Mastrogiacomo, 2012. "The success-index: an alternative approach to the h-index for evaluating an individual’s research output," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(3), pages 621-641, September.
    5. Franceschini, Fiorenzo & Maisano, Domenico, 2011. "Regularity in the research output of individual scientists: An empirical analysis by recent bibliometric tools," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 458-468.
    6. Antonio Abatemarco & Roberto Dell’Anno, 2013. "Certainty equivalent citation: generalized classes of citation indexes," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 263-271, January.
    7. Magnone, Edoardo, 2012. "An analysis for estimating the short-term effects of Japan's triple disaster on progress in materials science," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 289-297.
    8. Gerhard A. Wuehrer & Angela Elisabeth Smejkal, 2013. "The knowledge domain of the academy of international business studies (AIB) conferences: a longitudinal scientometric perspective for the years 2006–2011," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 541-561, May.
    9. Johannes Hönekopp & Julie Khan, 2012. "Future publication success in science is better predicted by traditional measures than by the h index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(3), pages 843-853, March.
    10. Tran, Trung & Linh, Hoang Khanh & La, Viet-Phuong & Ho, Manh-Toan & Vuong, Quan-Hoang, 2020. "Scrambling for higher metrics in the Journal Impact Factor bubble period: a real-world problem in science management and its implications," OSF Preprints dmsp9, Center for Open Science.
    11. Sergey Kolesnikov & Eriko Fukumoto & Barry Bozeman, 2018. "Researchers’ risk-smoothing publication strategies: Is productivity the enemy of impact?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1995-2017, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fabian Scheidegger & Andre Briviba & Bruno S. Frey, 2023. "Behind the curtains of academic publishing: strategic responses of economists and business scholars," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(8), pages 4765-4790, August.
    2. Carolin Michels & Ulrich Schmoch, 2014. "Impact of bibliometric studies on the publication behaviour of authors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 369-385, January.
    3. Vincent Larivière & Rodrigo Costas, 2016. "How Many Is Too Many? On the Relationship between Research Productivity and Impact," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-10, September.
    4. Brenda Cheang & Chongshou Li & Andrew Lim & Zhenzhen Zhang, 2015. "Identifying patterns and structural influences in the scientific communication of business knowledge," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(1), pages 159-189, April.
    5. Alexander Kalgin & Olga Kalgina & Anna Lebedeva, 2019. "Publication Metrics as a Tool for Measuring Research Productivity and Their Relation to Motivation," Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, National Research University Higher School of Economics, issue 1, pages 44-86.
    6. Lorna Wildgaard & Jesper W. Schneider & Birger Larsen, 2014. "A review of the characteristics of 108 author-level bibliometric indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 125-158, October.
    7. Linda Sīle & Raf Vanderstraeten, 2019. "Measuring changes in publication patterns in a context of performance-based research funding systems: the case of educational research in the University of Gothenburg (2005–2014)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(1), pages 71-91, January.
    8. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Myroslava Hladchenko, 2023. "Assessing the effects of publication requirements for professorship on research performance and publishing behaviour of Ukrainian academics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(8), pages 4589-4609, August.
    9. Christian Schneijderberg & Nicolai Götze & Lars Müller, 2022. "A study of 25 years of publication outputs in the German academic profession," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(1), pages 1-28, January.
    10. Dorte Henriksen, 2016. "The rise in co-authorship in the social sciences (1980–2013)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(2), pages 455-476, May.
    11. Калгин А. С. & Калгина О. В. & Лебедева А. А., 2019. "Оценка Публикационной Активности Как Способ Измерения Результативности Труда Ученых И Ее Связь С Мотивацией," Вопросы образования // Educational Studies Moscow, National Research University Higher School of Economics, issue 1, pages 44-86.
    12. Carmen Osuna & Laura Cruz-Castro & Luis Sanz-Menéndez, 2011. "Overturning some assumptions about the effects of evaluation systems on publication performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(3), pages 575-592, March.
    13. Beckmann, Klaus B., 2011. "Das liberale Trilemma," Working Paper 107/2010, Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg.
    14. Mikko Packalen & Jay Bhattacharya, 2017. "Neophilia ranking of scientific journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(1), pages 43-64, January.
    15. Costas, Rodrigo & Bordons, María, 2007. "The h-index: Advantages, limitations and its relation with other bibliometric indicators at the micro level," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 193-203.
    16. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo, 2015. "The VQR, Italy's second national research assessment: Methodological failures and ranking distortions," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(11), pages 2202-2214, November.
    17. Müller, Harry, 2012. "Die Zitationshäufigkeit als Qualitätsindikator im Rahmen der Forschungsleistungsmessung," Discussion Papers of the Institute for Organisational Economics 1/2012, University of Münster, Institute for Organisational Economics.
    18. Lawson, Cornelia & Geuna, Aldo & Ana Fernández-Zubieta & Toselli, Manuel & Kataishi, Rodrigo, 2015. "International Careers of Researchers in Biomedical Sciences: A Comparison of the US and the UK," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201514, University of Turin.
    19. Marian-Gabriel Hâncean & Matjaž Perc & Jürgen Lerner, 2021. "The coauthorship networks of the most productive European researchers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 201-224, January.
    20. Ajiferuke, Isola & Famoye, Felix, 2015. "Modelling count response variables in informetric studies: Comparison among count, linear, and lognormal regression models," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 499-513.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:86:y:2011:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-010-0222-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.