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

Ein Forschungsleistungsranking auf der Grundlage von Google Scholar

Contents:

Author Info

  • Dilger, Alexander
  • Müller, Harry

Abstract

Bei der Evaluation von Forschungsleistungen hat das gängige Verfahren, Publikationen anhand der Zeitschriften zu bewerten, in denen sie erschienen sind, ernstzunehmende Schwächen, da es Buchveröffentlichungen unberücksichtigt lässt und vom Ansehen einer Zeitschrift auf die Qualität jedes einzelnen Artikels in ihr schließt. Als Alternative wird ein direkt auf den Zitationen der einzelnen Veröffentlichung basierendes Verfahren vorgeschlagen, bei dem der Impact jedes Forschers individuell gemessen werden kann. Als Grundlage dient die Datenbank Google Scholar, da sie insbesondere in Hinblick auf die deutschsprachige Literatur die beste Abdeckung verspricht. Allerdings hat sie qualitative Schwächen, die eine sorgfältige Nachkontrolle und -korrektur der Ergebnisse erfordern. Bei einer bibliometrischen Untersuchung der aktuellen Veröffentlichungen (2005-2009) sämtlicher Mitglieder des VHB (Stand 2007) zeigt sich, dass die Zitationen einer Pareto-Verteilung folgen, an deren Spitze wenige Forscher einen Großteil der gesamten Zitationen auf sich vereinen. Mit Blick auf die unterschiedlichen Kommissionen des VHB wird deutlich, dass sich die Publikations- und Zitationskulturen in den einzelnen Teilfächern z. T. deutlich voneinander unterscheiden. Dies ist bei der Interpretation des Gesamtrankings zu berücksichtigen. -- Regarding the evaluation of academic research performance, the currently predominant method of judging an individual paper according to the academic journal it was published in implies a few drawbacks: Monographs and edited volumes cannot be assessed, and estimating the quality of an individual article by looking at the journal it was published in is problematic. This article presents a different approach by measuring the individual impact of each researcher. As a data source we use Google Scholar because it offers the best coverage available in the field of German academic literature in business administration. However, Google Scholar implies qualitative shortcomings that deserve a careful inspection and revision. We analyse all recent publications (2005-2009) of all members of the German Academic Association for Business Research (VHB). Among the researchers, the citations are distributed highly unequal and follow Pareto's Law: Few scholars gather a large part of all citations. Between the different subfields of business administration there exist large differences regarding their publication and citation cultures. This should be considered carefully when interpreting the results of the ranking.

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://econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/54740/1/681326018.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by University of Münster, Institute for Organisational Economics in its series Discussion Papers of the Institute for Organisational Economics with number 12/2011.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 2011
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:zbw:umiodp:122011

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Universitätsstr. 14-16, 48143 Münster
Phone: 02 51 / 83-2 29 10
Fax: 02 51 / 83-2 83 99
Web page: http://www.wiwi.uni-muenster.de/io/en/index.html
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

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. Sönke Albers, 2009. "Misleading Rankings of Research in Business," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 10, pages 352-363, 08.
  2. Dilger, Alexander, 2009. "Rankings von Zeitschriften und Personen in der BWL," IÖB-Diskussionspapiere 5/09, University of Münster, Institute for Economic Education.
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. Dilger, Alexander & Lütkenhöner, Laura & Müller, Harry, 2013. "Scholars' physical appearance, research performance and feelings of happiness," Discussion Papers of the Institute for Organisational Economics 6/2013, University of Münster, Institute for Organisational Economics.
  2. Dilger, Alexander, 2013. "Soll man das Handelsblatt-Ranking BWL boykottieren?," Discussion Papers of the Institute for Organisational Economics 3/2013, University of Münster, Institute for Organisational Economics.
  3. Müller, Harry & Dilger, Alexander, 2011. "Ein Ranking von Hochschulen und (Bundes-)Ländern am Beispiel der Betriebswirtschaftslehre," Discussion Papers of the Institute for Organisational Economics 8/2011, University of Münster, Institute for Organisational Economics.
  4. Müller, Harry & Dilger, Alexander, 2013. "Der Einfluss des Forschungsschwerpunkts auf den Zitationserfolg: Eine empirische Untersuchung anhand der Gesamtpublikationen deutschsprachiger Hochschullehrer für BWL," Discussion Papers of the Institute for Organisational Economics 1/2013, University of Münster, Institute for Organisational Economics.
  5. Müller, Harry, 2013. "Zur Ethik von Rankings im Hochschulwesen: Eine Betrachtung aus ökonomischer Perspektive," CIW Discussion Papers 1/2013, University of Münster, Center for Interdisciplinary Economics (CIW).
  6. Dilger, Alexander, 2012. "Förderung von Wissenschaft zu nationalen und europäischen Fragen," Discussion Papers of the Institute for Organisational Economics 5/2012, University of Münster, Institute for Organisational Economics.

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:zbw:umiodp:122011. 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: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics).

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.