L’ “R-Factor”: un nuovo modo di valutare la ricerca scientifica
As pointed out in Amin e Mabe (2000, p. 1), the journal impact factor (IF) “has moved in recent years from an obscure bibliometric indicator to become the chief quantitative measure of the quality of a journal, its research papers, the researchers who wrote those papers, and even the institution they work in.” However, the use of this index for evaluating individual scientists is dubious and may “skew the course of scientific research” (Monastersky, 2005, p, 1). Moreover the IF is, at most, able to measure only the quality of a very restricted range of research activities: namely, publishing journal articles. In the present work a new indicator of a researcher quality, named the Researcher Impact Factor (RF), is introduced. It is constructed as a function of the number and quality of publications (articles, books and working papers) and of the “other activities” usually associated with being a researcher (attending and/or organizing conferences, being the Editor, Associate Editor or referee for a journal, teaching or supervising at graduate level, coordinating research groups and so on). To show the characteristics of the new index, a numerical example is carried out to rank two hypothetical scientists. The main conclusion is that by replacing the IF with the RF in hiring, tenure decisions and awarding of grants would greatly increase the number of topics investigated and the number and quality of long run projects. The Excel spreadsheet used for the computations is available on demand from the authors.
|Date of creation:||Jan 2008|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://www.deps.unisi.it/Email:
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- repec:rie:review:v:12:y:2007:i:2:n:10 is not listed on IDEAS
- M. Davies & J. Hirschberg & J. Lye & C. Johnston & I. McDonald, 2005.
"Systematic Influences on Teaching Evaluations : The Case for Caution,"
Department of Economics - Working Papers Series
953, The University of Melbourne.
- Martin Davies & Joe Hirschberg & Jenny Lye & Carol Johnston & Ian Mcdonald, 2007. "Systematic Influences On Teaching Evaluations: The Case For Caution ," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 18-38, 03.
- Stigler, George J & Stigler, Stephen M & Friedland, Claire, 1995. "The Journals of Economics," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(2), pages 331-59, April.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:usi:wpaper:527. 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: (Fabrizio Becatti)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.