IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v108y2016i2d10.1007_s11192-016-1979-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research assessment using early citation information

Author

Listed:
  • Stephan B. Bruns

    () (University of Kassel)

  • David I. Stern

    () (The Australian National University)

Abstract

Abstract Peer-review based research assessment, as implemented in Australia, the United Kingdom, and some other countries, is a very costly exercise. We show that university rankings in economics based on long-run citation counts can be easily predicted using early citations. This would allow a research assessment to predict the relative long-run impact of articles published by a university immediately at the end of the evaluation period. We compare these citation-based university rankings with the rankings of the 2010 Excellence in Research assessment in Australia and the 2008 Research Assessment Exercise in the United Kingdom. Rank correlations are quite strong, but there are some differences between rankings. However, if assessors are willing to consider citation analysis to assess some disciplines, as is the case for the natural sciences and psychology in Australia, it seems reasonable to consider also including economics in that set.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephan B. Bruns & David I. Stern, 2016. "Research assessment using early citation information," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(2), pages 917-935, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:108:y:2016:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-016-1979-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-016-1979-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-016-1979-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sofronis Clerides & Panos Pashardes & Alexandros Polycarpou, 2011. "Peer Review vs Metric‐based Assessment: Testing for Bias in the RAE Ratings of UK Economics Departments," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 78(311), pages 565-583, July.
    2. Bertocchi, Graziella & Gambardella, Alfonso & Jappelli, Tullio & Nappi, Carmela A. & Peracchi, Franco, 2015. "Bibliometric evaluation vs. informed peer review: Evidence from Italy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 451-466.
    3. David L. Anderson & John Tressler, 2013. "The New Zealand performance-based research fund and its impact on publication activity in economics," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(1), pages 1-11, September.
    4. Im, Kyung So & Pesaran, M. Hashem & Shin, Yongcheol, 2003. "Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 53-74, July.
    5. Daniel Sgroi & Andrew J. Oswald, 2013. "How Should Peer‐review Panels Behave?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 0, pages 255-278, August.
    6. repec:esx:essedp:757 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Moed, Henk F., 2010. "Measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 265-277.
    8. David I. Stern, 2014. "High-Ranked Social Science Journal Articles Can Be Identified from Early Citation Information," Crawford School Research Papers 1406, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    9. John Hudson, 2013. "Ranking Journals," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 0, pages 202-222, August.
    10. Régibeau, P & Rockett, K, 2014. "A Tale of Two Metrics: Research Assessment vs Recognised Excellence," Economics Discussion Papers 14461, University of Essex, Department of Economics.
    11. Ludo Waltman & Clara Calero-Medina & Joost Kosten & Ed C.M. Noyons & Robert J.W. Tijssen & Nees Jan Eck & Thed N. Leeuwen & Anthony F.J. Raan & Martijn S. Visser & Paul Wouters, 2012. "The Leiden ranking 2011/2012: Data collection, indicators, and interpretation," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(12), pages 2419-2432, December.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. David L. Anderson & John Tressler, 2016. "The Impact of Citation Timing: A Framework and Examples," Working Papers in Economics 16/04, University of Waikato.
    2. repec:taf:applec:v:49:y:2017:i:45:p:4542-4553 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. repec:bla:ecinqu:v:55:y:2017:i:4:p:1945-1965 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. David L. Anderson & John Tressler, 2016. "Citation-Capture Rates for Economics Journals: Do they Differ from Other Disciplines and Does it Matter?," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 35(1), pages 73-85, March.
    5. repec:spr:scient:v:115:y:2018:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-018-2703-0 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. repec:eee:infome:v:12:y:2018:i:1:p:237-248 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. repec:eee:infome:v:12:y:2018:i:1:p:287-298 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. David L. Anderson & John Tressler, 2015. "Are Researcher Rankings Stable Across Alternative Output Measurement Schemes in the Context of a Time Limited Research Evaluation? The New Zealand Case," Working Papers in Economics 15/10, University of Waikato.
    9. John Gibson & David L. Anderson & John Tressler, 2017. "Citations Or Journal Quality: Which Is Rewarded More In The Academic Labor Market?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(4), pages 1945-1965, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Citations; Research assessment; Bibliometrics;

    JEL classification:

    • A14 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Sociology of Economics
    • H83 - Public Economics - - Miscellaneous Issues - - - Public Administration
    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions

    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:spr:scient:v:108:y:2016:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-016-1979-1. 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: (Sonal Shukla) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.