IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rua/wpaper/apru175ye20161.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Ранжирование Российских Экономических Журналов: Научный Метод Или «Игра В Цыфирь»?
[Ran Ranking of Russian Economic Journals: The Scientific Method or “Numbers Game”?]

Author

Listed:
  • Рубинштейн Александр Яковлевич

Abstract

Статья посвящена общим проблемам ранжирования журналов на примере критического анализа трех рейтингов российских экономических журналов, предложенных в последние годы. Методология построения данных рейтингов связана с данными РИНЦ, результатами экспертных опросов и комбинацией этих подходов. Выявлены принципиальные недостатки каждого из рейтингов и показано, что уязвимым местом таких разработок являются относительно произвольный выбор библиометрических индикаторов и их слабая корреляция с научным авторитетом журналов, недостаточно обоснованная процедура агрегирования используемых показателей и/ или экспертных оценок, а также нерепрезентативность опросов экспертов. В работе представлен пассивный эксперимент, в рамках которого сопоставлены результаты ранжирования журналов по указанным трем рейтингам и трем дополнительным критериям. Сделан общий вывод о невысоком уровне развития подобных исследований и отсутствии реальных оснований для применения указанных рейтингов в практике управления наукой и стимулирования труда ученых. This article is devoted to general problems of ranking on the example of critical analysis of the three ratings of Russian economic journals suggested in recent years, the methodology of construction of which are connected with the Russian Science Citation Index (RSCI) data, results of expert surveys and a combination of these approaches. The fundamental disadvantages of each of them are revealed and it is shown that the vulnerable points of such developments are relatively arbitrary choice of bibliometric indicators and their weak correlation with academic authority of journals, insufficiently substantiated procedure of aggregation of used indicators and/or expert analysis, as well as surveys of experts are not representative. This paper presents a «passive experiment», in terms of which were mapped the results of the ranking of journals, based on the three ratings and three additional criteria. Made the overall conclusion about the low level of development of such researches and the lack of real grounds for the application of these ratings in the practice of science management and motivation of scientists.

Suggested Citation

  • Рубинштейн Александр Яковлевич, "undated". "Ранжирование Российских Экономических Журналов: Научный Метод Или «Игра В Цыфирь»?
    [Ran Ranking of Russian Economic Journals: The Scientific Method or “Numbers Game”?]
    ," Working papers a:pru175:ye:2016:1, Institute of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:rua:wpaper:a:pru175:ye:2016:1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://journal.econorus.org/pdf/NEA-30.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. van Eck, Nees Jan & Waltman, Ludo, 2014. "CitNetExplorer: A new software tool for analyzing and visualizing citation networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 802-823.
    2. Loet Leydesdorff & Lutz Bornmann, 2011. "Integrated impact indicators compared with impact factors: An alternative research design with policy implications," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(11), pages 2133-2146, November.
    3. Aleskerov, Fuad, 2009. "Power indices taking into account agents' preferences," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 898, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    4. E. Balatsky & N. Ekimova., 2015. "The Experience of Ranking Russian Economic Journals," VOPROSY ECONOMIKI, N.P. Redaktsiya zhurnala "Voprosy Economiki", vol. 8.
    5. Mingers, John & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2015. "A review of theory and practice in scientometrics," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(1), pages 1-19.
    6. Guerrero-Bote, Vicente P. & Moya-Anegón, Félix, 2012. "A further step forward in measuring journals’ scientific prestige: The SJR2 indicator," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(4), pages 674-688.
    7. A. Muravyev., 2013. "On Scientific Value of Russian Journals in Economics and Related Fields," VOPROSY ECONOMIKI, N.P. Redaktsiya zhurnala "Voprosy Economiki", vol. 4.
    8. Waltman, Ludo, 2016. "A review of the literature on citation impact indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 365-391.
    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. repec:rnp:ecopol:ep1767 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:rnp:ecopol:ep1768 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Keywords

    journal ranking; bibliometric indicators; citation; expert analysis; aggregation; arranging;

    JEL classification:

    • A11 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Role of Economics; Role of Economists
    • A14 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Sociology of Economics
    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:rua:wpaper:a:pru175:ye:2016:1. 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: (). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/derasru.html .

    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.