IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jamist/v61y2010i1p132-140.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Testing the trade‐off between productivity and quality in research activities

Author

Listed:
  • Giovanni Abramo
  • Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo
  • Flavia Di Costa

Abstract

In recent years there has been an increasingly pressing need for the evaluation of results from public‐sector research activity, particularly to permit the efficient allocation of ever scarcer resources. Many of the studies and evaluation exercises that have been conducted at the national and international levels emphasize the quality dimension of research output, while neglecting that of productivity. This work is intended to test for the possible existence of correlation between quantity and quality of scientific production and determine whether the most productive researchers are also those that achieve results that are qualitatively better than those of their colleagues. The analysis proposed refers to the entire Italian university system and is based on the observation of production in the hard sciences by more than 26,000 researchers in the period 2001–2005. The results show that the output of more‐productive researchers is superior in quality than that of less‐productive researchers. The relation between productivity and quality results is largely insensitive to the types of indicators or the test methods applied and also seems to differ little among the various disciplines examined.

Suggested Citation

  • Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo & Flavia Di Costa, 2010. "Testing the trade‐off between productivity and quality in research activities," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(1), pages 132-140, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jamist:v:61:y:2010:i:1:p:132-140
    DOI: 10.1002/asi.21254
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21254
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/asi.21254?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Christopher Zou & Jordan B. Peterson, 2016. "Quantifying the scientific output of new researchers using the zp-index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(3), pages 901-916, March.
    2. Abramo, Giovanni & D'Angelo, CiriacoAndrea & Di Costa, Flavia, 2024. "The moderating role of personal characteristics of authors in the publications’ quality for quantity trade-off," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1).
    3. Abramo, Giovanni & D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea, 2016. "A comparison of university performance scores and ranks by MNCS and FSS," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 889-901.
    4. Jonas Lindahl & Rickard Danell, 2016. "The information value of early career productivity in mathematics: a ROC analysis of prediction errors in bibliometricly informed decision making," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 2241-2262, December.
    5. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Anastasiia Soldatenkova, 2016. "The dispersion of the citation distribution of top scientists’ publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1711-1724, December.
    6. Lutz Bornmann & Werner Marx, 2014. "How to evaluate individual researchers working in the natural and life sciences meaningfully? A proposal of methods based on percentiles of citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 487-509, January.
    7. Osmo Kivinen & Juha Hedman & Päivi Kaipainen, 2013. "Productivity analysis of research in Natural Sciences, Technology and Clinical Medicine: an input–output model applied in comparison of Top 300 ranked universities of 4 North European and 4 East Asian," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(2), pages 683-699, February.
    8. Bornmann, Lutz & Williams, Richard, 2017. "Can the journal impact factor be used as a criterion for the selection of junior researchers? A large-scale empirical study based on ResearcherID data," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 788-799.
    9. Matthew J Michalska-Smith & Stefano Allesina, 2017. "And, not or: Quality, quantity in scientific publishing," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(6), pages 1-12, June.
    10. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Fulvio Viel, 2011. "The field-standardized average impact of national research systems compared to world average: the case of Italy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(2), pages 599-615, August.
    11. Huang, Ding-wei, 2016. "Positive correlation between quality and quantity in academic journals," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 329-335.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jamist:v:61:y:2010:i:1:p:132-140. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.asis.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.