Why metrics can (and should?) be used in the Social Sciences
Just like myself, John Mingers has long been interested in the respective merits of peer review and metrics. Hence, he asked a group of key people to debate this very topic at an all-day even at Kent Business School on the 30th of May. I was very happy to be part of this illustrous company. The twitter feed is here.
- Harzing, A.W. (2017) Why metrics can (and should?) be applied in the Social Sciences, presented at The Future of Research Assessment Peer Review vs. Metrics, University of Kent, 30 May 2017. Available online...
The full presentation is available here, but here is a taster summarizing the main conclusions.
Related blog posts
- Sacrifice a little accuracy for a lot more comprehensive coverage
- Do Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science speak your language?
- Bibliometrics in the Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences
- Publish or Perish: Realising Google Scholar's potential to democratise citation analysis
- How to get listed on the ESI ranking of highly cited authors
- Is Google Scholar flawless? Of course not!
- From h-index to hIa: The ins and outs of research metrics
- Citation analysis for the Social Sciences: metrics and data-sources
- Working with ISI data: Beware of categorisation problems
- Benchmarking research performance
- Web of Science: How to be robbed of 10 years of citations in one week!
- Bank error in your favour? How to gain 3,000 citations in a week
- Microsoft Academic is one year old: the Phoenix is ready to leave the nest
- Running the REF on a rainy Sunday afternoon: Do metrics match peer review?
Copyright © 2018 Anne-Wil Harzing. All rights reserved. Page last modified on Thu 11 Jan 2018 08:30
Anne-Wil Harzing is Professor of International Management at Middlesex University, London. In addition to her academic duties, she also maintains the Journal Quality List and is the driving force behind the popular Publish or Perish software program.