...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Aslib Proceedings >How arbitrary are the weights assigned to books in performance-based research funding? An empirical assessment of the weight and size of monographs in Flanders
【24h】

How arbitrary are the weights assigned to books in performance-based research funding? An empirical assessment of the weight and size of monographs in Flanders

机译：基于绩效的研究经费分配给图书的权重是多少？法兰德斯专着的重量和大小的实证评估

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to present an empirical assessment of the weight assigned to monographs in the publication indicator of the performance-based research funding system (PRFS) in Flanders, Belgium. By relating publication weight to publication size the authors offer an alternative perspective on the production of scholars who publish monographs. This perspective on weights is linked to the aggregation level at which PRFS indicators are used: the national/regional one as opposed to the local one. In Flanders as elsewhere the publication indicator designed for funding distribution between universities has sometimes trickled down to institutions, their faculties and departments.Design/methodology/approachAs an alternative indicator of scholarly production the authors propose the median number of pages of a publication type. Measuring the size of publications allows to compare the weight ratio between monographs and journal articles in the publication indicator to their size ratio in the VABB-SHW database. The authors compare two levels, one of four universities and one of 16 disciplines.FindingsMedian publication size differences between disciplines are much larger than those between universities. This indicates that an increase of monographs weight in the publication indicator would hardly affect funding distribution at the regional level. Disciplines with a relatively large share of monographs, however, would contribute more to the publication indicator. Hence an increase of monographs weight might provide a better balance between fields and between publication types.Originality/valueThis paper presents a thought experiment regarding the weight assigned to different publication types in the publication indicator of the Flemish PRFS: what would happen if this weight were replaced by the median number of pages of a publication type? In doing so, we highlight that such weighting schemes play an important role in finding a balance between fields of research. The sizeable differences between weight and size ratios offer a new and critical perspective on the weighting schemes currently used in PRFS, also in other countries.
机译：目的 n本文的目的是对比利时佛兰德基于绩效的研究资助系统（PRFS）的出版指标中的专着权重进行实证评估。通过将出版物的重量与出版物的大小联系起来，作者对出版专着的学者的作品提供了另一种观点。关于权重的这种观点与使用PRFS指标的汇总级别相关联：国家/地区指标而不是本地指标。在法兰德斯（Flanders）和其他地方一样，旨在为大学之间分配资金而设计的出版物指标有时会下溯到机构，学院和系系。 n设计/方法论/方法 n作为学术成果的替代指标，作者建议出版物的中位数类型。通过测量出版物的大小，可以比较出版物指标中的专着和期刊文章之间的权重比与VABB-SHW数据库中它们的大小比。作者比较了两个级别，即四所大学之一和16个学科之一。 n发现 n学科之间的中位数出版物规模差异比大学之间的出版物差异大得多。这表明出版指标中专着权重的增加几乎不会影响区域一级的资金分配。但是，具有较大专着份额的学科将对出版指标做出更大贡献。因此，增加专着的权重可能会在字段之间和出版物类型之间提供更好的平衡。 n原始性/值 n本文提出了一项关于在佛兰德PRFS出版物指标中分配给不同出版物类型的权重的思想实验：这个权重被出版物类型的中位数取代了吗？在这样做的过程中，我们强调指出，这种加权方案在寻找研究领域之间的平衡中起着重要作用。重量比与尺寸比之间的巨大差异为PRFS和其他国家当前使用的加权方案提供了新的批判性视角。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号