The Dangers of Partial Bibliometric Evaluation in the Social Sciences

Diana Hicks

Economia politica, 2006, issue 2, 145-162

Abstract: This paper argues that the bibliometric methods that should be used to evaluate social science research differ from those that are used to evaluate scientific research. The argument is based on a review of several decades of research into the quantitative characteristics of the social science literature. Unfortunately, evaluation of social science research if done properly is more complex and expensive than evaluation of science. This is because social scientists publish in a broader range of literature and build their work on a broader base both topically and over a longer period of time than do scientists. A thorough understanding of the nature of social science literature will enable sound evaluations to be designed.

Date: 2006
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.rivisteweb.it/download/article/10.1428/22461 (application/pdf)
https://www.rivisteweb.it/doi/10.1428/22461 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

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:mul:jb33yl:doi:10.1428/22461:y:2006:i:2:p:145-162

Access Statistics for this article

Economia politica is currently edited by Alberto Quadrio Curzio, Giorgio Lunghini, Pier Carlo Nicola

More articles in Economia politica from Società editrice il Mulino
Bibliographic data for series maintained by ().