Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Intellectual Infl uence: Quality versus Quantity

Contents:

Author Info

  • László Á. Kóczy

    ()
    (Óbuda University)

  • Alexandru Nichifor
  • Martin Strobel

Abstract

To take development and budgeting decisions for research activi- ties the officials in charge need to constantly evaluate and assess the quality of research. Over the years a handful of scoring methods for academic journals have been proposed. Discussing the most prominent methods (de facto standards) we show that they cannot distinguish quality from quantity at article level and that they are inherently biased against journals publishing more articles. If we consider the length of a journal by the number of pages or characters, then all methods are biased against lengthier journals. The systematic bias we nd is analytically tractable and implies that the methods are ma- nipulable. We show that the strategies for successful manipulation are relatively easy to infer and implement. The implications of our ndings extend beyond the evaluation of academic research, to related settings like the ranking of web domains. Non-manipulable methods for measuring intellectual in uence exist.

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: http://uni-obuda.hu/users/vecseya/RePEc/pkk/wpaper/1009.pdf
File Function: Manuscript, 2010
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Óbuda University, Keleti Faculty of Business and Management in its series Working Paper Series with number 1009.

as in new window
Length: 15 pages
Date of creation: 2010
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:pkk:wpaper:1009.rdf

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 1084 Budapest, Tavaszmezö u. 15-17
Phone: +36-1-6665208
Fax: +36-1-6665209
Web page: http://www.kgk.uni-obuda.hu
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: scoring methods bias; ranking rules bias; impact factor; invariant method; LP method; invariance to article-splitting; quality and quantity in ranking academic journals;

Other versions of this item:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

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. Ignacio Palacios-Huerta & Oscar Volij, 2002. "The Measurement of Intellectual Influence," Economic theory and game theory 015, Oscar Volij.
  2. Shoham,Yoav & Leyton-Brown,Kevin, 2009. "Multiagent Systems," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521899437, April.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Laszlo A. Koczy & Martin Strobel, 2010. "The World Cup of Economics Journals: A Ranking by a Tournament Method," IEHAS Discussion Papers 1018, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies, Hungarian Academy of Sciences.

Lists

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

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pkk:wpaper:1009.rdf. 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: (Alexandra Vécsey).

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.