• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of advances in management research >Assessment of research impact through citation analysis: a new approach
【24h】

Assessment of research impact through citation analysis: a new approach

机译：通过引文分析评估研究影响：一种新方法

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

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to reveal the limitations of h-index in assessing research performance through citation analysis and suggest two new indexes called prime index (P-index) and value added index (V-index), which are simpler to compute than g-index and more informative. For more serious research performance evaluation, analytic hierarchy process (AHP) methodology is proposed. Design/methodology/approach - The methodology adopted is to compare existing indexes for citation-based research assessment and identify their limitations, particularly the h-index, which is most commonly employed. It gives advantages of g-index over h-index and then proposes P-index which is simpler to compute than g-index but is more powerful in information content than g-index. Another V-index is proposed on a similar philosophy as P-index by considering total number of citations/author. For serious evaluation of finite candidates for awards/recognitions, a seven-criteria-based AHP is proposed. All new approaches have been illustrated by drawing raw data from Google scholar-powered website H-POP. Findings - This paper demonstrates over-hype about use of h-index over g-index. However, it shows that newly proposed P-index is much simpler in computation than g but better than g-index. V-index is a quick way to ascertain the value added by a research scientist in multiple-authored research papers. P-index gives a value 3-4 percent higher than g and it is holistic index as it uses complete data of citations. AHP is a very powerful multi-criteria approach and it also shows g-index to be a more important factor, whereas h-index is the least important but frequently used approach. It is hoped that the findings of this paper will help in rectifying the misplaced emphasis on h-index alone. Research limitations/implications - The research focus has been to suggest new faster, better methods of research assessment. However, a detailed comparison of all existing approaches with the new approaches will call for testing these over a large number of data sets. Its limitation is that it has tested the approaches on 5 academics for illustrating AHP and 20 researchers for comparing new indexes with some of the existing indexes. All existing indexes are also not covered. Practical implications - The outcomes of this research may have major practical applications for research assessment of academics/researchers and rectify the imbalance in assessment by reducing over-hype on h-index. For more serious evaluation of research performance of academics, the seven-criteria AHP approach will be more comprehensive and holistic in comparison with a single criterion citation metric. One hopes that the findings of this paper will receive much attention/debate. Social implications - Research assessment based on proposed approaches is likely to lead to greater satisfaction among those evaluated and higher confidence in the evaluation criteria. Originality/value - P- and V-indexes are original. Application of AHP for multi-criteria assessment of research through citation analysis is also a new idea.
机译：目的-本文的目的是通过引用分析揭示h指数在评估研究绩效方面的局限性，并提出两个新的指数，称为素数指数（P-index）和增值指数（V-index），这两个指数比较容易理解比g-index进行计算，信息量更大。为了进行更认真的研究绩效评估，提出了层次分析法（AHP）。设计/方法/方法-所采用的方法是比较现有索引，以进行基于引文的研究评估，并确定其局限性，尤其是最常用的h指数。它提供了g索引优于h索引的优点，然后提出了p索引，该索引比g索引更易于计算，但在信息内容上比g索引更强大。考虑到引文/作者的总数，提出了一种与P指数类似的哲学上的V指数。为了对授予/认可的有限候选人进行认真评估，提出了基于七个标准的AHP。通过从Google学术支持的网站H-POP提取原始数据，可以说明所有新方法。调查结果-本文证明了有关使用h指数而不是g指数的过度宣传。但是，它表明新提出的P索引在计算上比g简单得多，但比g索引好。 V指数是一种确定研究科学家在多篇合着论文中增加的价值的快速方法。 P索引的值比g高3-4％，它是整体索引，因为它使用了完整的引文数据。 AHP是一种非常强大的多准则方法，它还显示g指数是一个更重要的因素，而h指数是最不重要但经常使用的方法。希望本文的发现将有助于纠正仅对h指数的错误强调。研究局限性/含义-研究重点一直是提出新的更快，更好的研究评估方法。但是，将所有现有方法与新方法进行详细比较将需要对大量数据集进行测试。它的局限性在于，它已经对5名学者进行了AHP图解法和20名研究人员对新指标与现有指标进行比较的方法进行了测试。所有现有索引也不包括在内。实际意义-这项研究的结果可能在学术界/研究人员的研究评估中具有重要的实际应用，并通过减少h指数的过度宣传来纠正评估中的不平衡现象。为了更认真地评估学者的研究表现，与单一标准引用度量相比，七标准AHP方法将更加全面和全面。希望本文的研究结果能引起人们的关注/争论。社会影响-基于提议方法的研究评估可能会导致被评估者更加满意，并对评估标准更加信任。创意/价值-P指数和V指数是原始的。通过引用分析将AHP应用于研究的多标准评估也是一个新想法。

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