When Social Scientists Disagree.pdf (41.65 kB)
When social scientists disagree: comments on the Butler-van den Besselaar debate
In 2003, Linda Butler found evidence that as a result of “the increased culture of evaluation faced by the [Australian higher education] sector … [in which] significant funds are distributed to universities, and within universities, on the basis of aggregate publication counts, with little attention paid to the impact or quality of that output … journal publication productivity has increased significantly in the last decade [the 1990s], but its impact has declined” (Butler, 2003a, p.143). More recently, however, Peter van den Besselaar, Ulf Heyman and Ulf Sandström (hereafter BHS) have concluded from their bibliometric analysis that “Australia not only improved its share of research output but also increased research quality, implying that total impact was greatly increased”, and hence “Butler’s main conclusions are not correct” (van den Besselaar et al., 2017, p.1 ). How can we explain this disagreement?
History
Publication status
- Published
File Version
- Accepted version
Journal
Journal of InformetricsISSN
1751-1577Publisher
ElsevierExternal DOI
Issue
3Volume
11Page range
937-940Department affiliated with
- SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit Publications
Full text available
- Yes
Peer reviewed?
- Yes
Legacy Posted Date
2018-12-13First Open Access (FOA) Date
2018-12-13First Compliant Deposit (FCD) Date
2018-12-12Usage metrics
Categories
No categories selectedLicence
Exports
RefWorks
BibTeX
Ref. manager
Endnote
DataCite
NLM
DC