IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jinfst/v66y2015i9p1954-1958.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

To intervene or not to intervene; is that the question? On the role of scientometrics in research evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Sarah Rijcke
  • Alexander Rushforth

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Sarah Rijcke & Alexander Rushforth, 2015. "To intervene or not to intervene; is that the question? On the role of scientometrics in research evaluation," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(9), pages 1954-1958, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jinfst:v:66:y:2015:i:9:p:1954-1958
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/asi.23382
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Juan Pablo Pardo-Guerra & Prithviraj Pahwa, 2022. "The Extended Computational Case Method: A Framework for Research Design," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 51(4), pages 1826-1867, November.
    2. Bornmann, Lutz & Williams, Richard, 2017. "Can the journal impact factor be used as a criterion for the selection of junior researchers? A large-scale empirical study based on ResearcherID data," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 788-799.
    3. Carlo Galli & Stefano Guizzardi, 2021. "The Effect of Article Characteristics on Citation Number in a Diachronic Dataset of the Biomedical Literature on Chronic Inflammation: An Analysis by Ensemble Machines," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-11, April.
    4. Anne K. Krüger, 2020. "Quantification 2.0? Bibliometric Infrastructures in Academic Evaluation," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 58-67.
    5. Andersen, Jens Peter, 2017. "An empirical and theoretical critique of the Euclidean index," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 455-465.
    6. Sabrina Petersohn & Thomas Heinze, 2018. "Professionalization of bibliometric research assessment. Insights from the history of the Leiden Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS)," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 565-578.
    7. Clemens Blümel & Stephan Gauch, 2021. "Introduction to special issue: quantitative studies of science in Germany," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(12), pages 9641-9647, December.
    8. Anne K Krüger & Sabrina Petersohn, 2022. "‘I want to be able to do what I know the tools will allow us to do’: Practicing evaluative bibliometrics through digital infrastructure," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(4), pages 475-485.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:jinfst:v:66:y:2015:i:9:p:1954-1958. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.asis.org .

    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.