EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Quality versus quantity in scientific impact

Jasleen Kaur, Emilio Ferrara, Filippo Menczer, Alessandro Flammini and Filippo Radicchi

Journal of Informetrics, 2015, vol. 9, issue 4, 800-808

Abstract: Citation metrics are becoming pervasive in the quantitative evaluation of scholars, journals, and institutions. Hiring, promotion, and funding decisions increasingly rely on a variety of impact metrics that cannot disentangle quality from quantity of scientific output, and are biased by factors such as discipline and academic age. Biases affecting the evaluation of single papers are compounded when one aggregates citation-based metrics across an entire publication record. It is not trivial to compare the quality of two scholars that during their careers have published at different rates, in different disciplines, and in different periods of time. Here we evaluate a method based on the generation of a statistical baseline specifically tailored on the academic profile of each researcher. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the approach in decoupling the roles of quantity and quality of publications to explain how a certain level of impact is achieved. The method can be extended to simultaneously suppress any source of bias. As an illustration, we use it to capture the quality of the work of Nobel laureates irrespective of number of publications, academic age, and discipline, even when traditional metrics indicate low impact in absolute terms. The procedure is flexible enough to allow for the evaluation of, and fair comparison among, arbitrary collections of papers – scholar publication records, journals, and institutions; in fact, it extends a similar technique that was previously applied to the ranking of research units and countries in specific disciplines (Crespo, Ortuño-Ortí, & Ruiz-Castillo, 2012). We further apply the methodology to almost a million scholars and over six thousand journals to measure the impact that cannot be explained by the volume of publications alone.

Keywords: Citation analysis; Scientific impact; Research evaluation; Quality; Quantity (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2015
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (11)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157715200120
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:infome:v:9:y:2015:i:4:p:800-808

DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2015.07.008

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Informetrics is currently edited by Leo Egghe

More articles in Journal of Informetrics from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().

 
Page updated 2025-03-19
Handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:9:y:2015:i:4:p:800-808