IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Weight for citations or weights for numerousness? Evaluating Italy's academic economists

  • Marcuzzo Maria Cristina
  • Zacchia Giulia

The aim of this paper is to offer a contribution to the analysis of which bibliometric indicators are best suited to the functions they could be expected to perform with the ongoing reform of the Italian university system. We will compare two pictures representing Italian economists using two different indexes: the "h" index based on the idea that the quality of research is to be measured in terms of its «impact», so it counts the quantity of citations of research products corrected on the basis of the number of publications and the "EconlitNumber" that attaches importance to the numerousness of publications corrected on the basis of the weight to be attributed, by the evaluators, to products of research, on the basis of characteristics (place and publication typology). Comparing the results obtained we demonstrate that they give rise to strikingly different rankings of individuals, Universities and Faculties, and are therefore to be approached very gingerly.

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:
Download Restriction: no

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by Società editrice il Mulino in its journal Politica economica - Journal of Economic Policy (PEJEP).

Volume (Year): (2010)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
Pages: 409

in new window

Handle: RePEc:mul:je8794:doi:10.1429/33589:y:2010:i:3:p:409
Contact details of provider:

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

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

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mul:je8794:doi:10.1429/33589:y:2010:i:3:p:409. 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: ()

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.