IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jinfst/v76y2025i9p1174-1187.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Finding “similar” universities using ChatGPT for institutional benchmarking: A large‐scale comparison of European universities

Author

Listed:
  • Benedetto Lepori
  • Lutz Bornmann
  • Mario Gay

Abstract

The study objective was to evaluate the efficacy of ChatGPT in identifying “similar” institutions for benchmarking the research performance of a university. Benchmarking is deemed a promising approach to compare “similar with similar” as a better alternative to rankings (comparing “different” universities). Current approaches either focus on a limited number of “quantitative” dimensions or are too complex for most users. We conducted large‐scale testing by tasking ChatGPT with identifying the most similar European universities in terms of research performance, utilizing the European Tertiary Education Register data. We tested whether the peers suggested by ChatGPT were similar to the focal university on size, research intensity, and subject composition. Additionally, we evaluated whether providing more specific instructions improved the results. The findings offer a nuanced perspective on the potential and risks of using ChatGPT to identify peer institutions for benchmarking. On one hand, solely using ChatGPT would replicate the visibility biases associated with university rankings, thereby undermining the rationale for benchmarking. On the other hand, relying on semantic associations might capture dimensions of university similarity that are relevant and difficult to capture through quantitative methods. We finally reflected on the broader implications for scholars in higher education and science studies research.

Suggested Citation

  • Benedetto Lepori & Lutz Bornmann & Mario Gay, 2025. "Finding “similar” universities using ChatGPT for institutional benchmarking: A large‐scale comparison of European universities," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 76(9), pages 1174-1187, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jinfst:v:76:y:2025:i:9:p:1174-1187
    DOI: 10.1002/asi.25010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.25010
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/asi.25010?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
    ---><---

    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:76:y:2025:i:9:p:1174-1187. 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.