Department of Modern Languages Chair of the Board of the Academy of Finland How to measure excellence in Social Sciences and Humanities 15122010 artomustajokihelsinkifi 1 excellence ID: 794958
Download The PPT/PDF document "Arto Mustajoki University of Helsinki" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Arto MustajokiUniversity of HelsinkiDepartment of Modern Languages Chair of the Board of the Academy of Finland
How to measure excellence in Social Sciences (and Humanities)
15.12.2010
arto.mustajoki@helsinki.fi
1
Slide2excellence = scientific merits = publicationsjournal articles
, book chapters, books
, conference proceeding
15.12.2010
2
Osasto / Henkilön nimi / Esityksen nimi
The
usual
interpretation
of EXCELLENCE
Slide3Two modes of publication practicesTYPE 1
Publications have several authors
All relevant research is published in articles
English is the only publication language
TYPE
2
One
author
per
publication
Books
play an important role
Other
languages
are used as well
Slide4Formats of publications in different fields
Monographs
Articles
in referee journalsArticles
and
chapters
in
books
Articles
in
conference
proceedings
Natural
1,3 %
71 %
12 %
16 %
Technical
0,6 %
24 %
8 %
67 %
Medical
0,3 %
91 %
7 %
1 %
Social
6,0 %
40 %
43 %
11 %
Humanities
4,
0 %
27 %
62 %
7 %
Slide5Types of publications in different fields
Publications
in Finnish (% of scientific publications )
Publications in Finland (% of scientific publications )
Publications
for wider public (% of all publications)
Average number of authors
Natural
12 %
22 %
4,0 %
3,6
Technical
10 %
29 %
3,2 %
3,1
Medical
25 %
28 %
0,6 %
5,1
Social
54 %
60 %
7,5 %
1,8
Humanities
51
%
67 %
11,0 %
1,1
Slide6WoS Publ.WoS
Cit.
H-index
Sams
123
5254
40
Niiniluoto
35
178
7
Koskenniemi
19
57
5
Palonen
262Janhunen200Frösen 100Tommila321
15.12.2010
6
Osasto / Henkilön nimi / Esityksen nimi
Publication records of some top researchers in the field of SSH
PoP
P
PoP
C
H-index
WoS
c /
PoP
c
500
7122
58
74 %
344
2365
23
8 %
277
2701
21
2 %
162
528
11
1 %
135
454
8
0 %
38
71
5
0 %
78
73
4
3 %
Slide7Due to the publication structure (book chapters, book) and poor coverage of data bases normal bibliometric indicators are less reliable or totally useless;Field adjustment needed but doesn’t guarantee fair assessment especially in small fields;
Possible discrepancy of peer opinions due to differences in definition of excellent research
15.12.2010
7
Osasto / Henkilön nimi / Esityksen nimi
Conclusions
for
assessment
of SSH
Slide8“If an academic shows good citation metrics, it is very likely that he or she has made a significant impact on the field.”“However, the reverse is not necessarily true. If an academic shows weak citation metrics, this may be caused by a lack of impact on the field, but also by one or more of the following:
Working in a small field; Publishing in a language other than English;
Publishing mainly (in) books.“
15.12.20108
Osasto / Henkilön nimi / Esityksen nimi
Publish
or
Perish
Slide9“We are different! In assessing our work, it is not possible to use bibliometric methods at all”Yes, it is true but peer review can not be the only acceptable way of assessing research performance. Other tools are needed as well.Journal categorisation (Norway, Australia, Finland; ERIH ) one option: every field has top journals and less prestigious journals
15.12.2010
9
Osasto / Henkilön nimi / Esityksen nimi
What
to
do
?