IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/infome/v13y2019i1p87-104.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the Shapley value and its application to the Italian VQR research assessment exercise

Author

Listed:
  • Demetrescu, Camil
  • Lupia, Francesco
  • Mendicelli, Angelo
  • Ribichini, Andrea
  • Scarcello, Francesco
  • Schaerf, Marco

Abstract

Research assessment exercises have now become common evaluation tools in a number of countries. These exercises have the goal of guiding merit-based public funds allocation, stimulating improvement of research productivity through competition and assessing the impact of adopted research support policies. One case in point is Italy's most recent research assessment effort, VQR 2011–2014 (Research Quality Evaluation), which, in addition to research institutions, also evaluated university departments, and individuals in some cases (i.e., recently hired research staff and members of PhD committees). However, the way an institution's score was divided, according to VQR rules, between its constituent departments or its staff members does not enjoy many desirable properties well known from coalitional game theory (e.g., budget balance, fairness, marginality). We propose, instead, an alternative score division rule that is based on the notion of Shapley value, a well known solution concept in coalitional game theory, which enjoys the desirable properties mentioned above. For a significant test case (namely, Sapienza University of Rome, the largest university in Italy), we present a detailed comparison of the scores obtained, for substructures and individuals, by applying the official VQR rules, with those resulting from Shapley value computations. We show that there are significant differences in the resulting scores, making room for improvements in the allocation rules used in research assessment exercises.

Suggested Citation

  • Demetrescu, Camil & Lupia, Francesco & Mendicelli, Angelo & Ribichini, Andrea & Scarcello, Francesco & Schaerf, Marco, 2019. "On the Shapley value and its application to the Italian VQR research assessment exercise," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 87-104.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:13:y:2019:i:1:p:87-104
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2018.11.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157718302141
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joi.2018.11.008?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Maniquet, Francois, 2003. "A characterization of the Shapley value in queueing problems," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 109(1), pages 90-103, March.
    2. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo, 2016. "Refrain from adopting the combination of citation and journal metrics to grade publications, as used in the Italian national research assessment exercise (VQR 2011–2014)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 2053-2065, December.
    3. Debasis Mishra & Bharath Rangarajan, 2007. "Cost sharing in a job scheduling problem," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 29(3), pages 369-382, October.
    4. Richard S. J. Tol, 2012. "Shapley values for assessing research production and impact of schools and scholars," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(3), pages 763-780, March.
    5. Rebora, Gianfranco & Turri, Matteo, 2013. "The UK and Italian research assessment exercises face to face," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1657-1666.
    6. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Flavia Di Costa, 2011. "National research assessment exercises: the effects of changing the rules of the game during the game," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(1), pages 229-238, July.
    7. Karpov, Alexander, 2014. "Equal weights coauthorship sharing and the Shapley value are equivalent," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 71-76.
    8. Hiroshi Nagamochi & Dao-Zhi Zeng & Naohiśa Kabutoya & Toshihide Ibaraki, 1997. "Complexity of the Minimum Base Game on Matroids," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 146-164, February.
    9. H. W. Kuhn, 1955. "The Hungarian method for the assignment problem," Naval Research Logistics Quarterly, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(1‐2), pages 83-97, March.
    10. Martin J. Osborne & Ariel Rubinstein, 1994. "A Course in Game Theory," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262650401, April.
    11. Moulin, Herve, 1992. "An Application of the Shapley Value to Fair Division with Money," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(6), pages 1331-1349, November.
    12. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo, 2015. "The VQR, Italy's second national research assessment: Methodological failures and ranking distortions," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(11), pages 2202-2214, November.
    13. Franceschini, Fiorenzo & Maisano, Domenico, 2017. "Critical remarks on the Italian research assessment exercise VQR 2011–2014," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 337-357.
    14. Xiaotie Deng & Christos H. Papadimitriou, 1994. "On the Complexity of Cooperative Solution Concepts," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 19(2), pages 257-266, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Camil Demetrescu & Irene Finocchi & Andrea Ribichini & Marco Schaerf, 2022. "On computer science research and its temporal evolution," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4913-4938, August.
    2. Battiston, Pietro & Sacco, Pier Luigi & Stanca, Luca, 2022. "Cover effects on citations uncovered: Evidence from Nature," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    3. Domenico A. Maisano & Luca Mastrogiacomo & Fiorenzo Franceschini, 2020. "Short-term effects of non-competitive funding to single academic researchers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(3), pages 1261-1280, June.
    4. Camil Demetrescu & Andrea Ribichini & Marco Schaerf, 2020. "Are Italian research assessment exercises size-biased?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 533-549, October.
    5. Cappelletti-Montano, Beniamino & Columbu, Silvia & Montaldo, Stefano & Musio, Monica, 2022. "Interpreting the outcomes of research assessments: A geometrical approach," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1).
    6. Camil Demetrescu & Irene Finocchi & Andrea Ribichini & Marco Schaerf, 2020. "On bibliometrics in academic promotions: a case study in computer science and engineering in Italy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(3), pages 2207-2228, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Camil Demetrescu & Andrea Ribichini & Marco Schaerf, 2020. "Are Italian research assessment exercises size-biased?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 533-549, October.
    2. Debasis Mishra & Bharath Rangarajan, 2007. "Cost sharing in a job scheduling problem," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 29(3), pages 369-382, October.
    3. Banerjee, Sreoshi, 2023. "Stability and fairness in sequencing games: optimistic approach and pessimistic scenarios," MPRA Paper 118680, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Kar, Anirban & Mitra, Manipushpak & Mutuswami, Suresh, 2009. "On the coincidence of the prenucleolus and the Shapley value," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 16-25, January.
    5. Francesco Giovanni Avallone & Alberto Quagli & Paola Ramassa, 2022. "Interdisciplinary research by accounting scholars: An exploratory study," FINANCIAL REPORTING, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2022(2), pages 5-34.
    6. Cubukcu, K. Mert, 2020. "The problem of fair division of surplus development rights in redevelopment of urban areas: Can the Shapley value help?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    7. Giulio Marini & Viviana Meschitti, 2018. "The trench warfare of gender discrimination: evidence from academic promotions to full professor in Italy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(2), pages 989-1006, May.
    8. Abramo, Giovanni & D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea & Di Costa, Flavia, 2019. "When research assessment exercises leave room for opportunistic behavior by the subjects under evaluation," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 830-840.
    9. Cheng‐Kuang Wu & Yi‐Ming Chen & Dachrahn Wu & Ching‐Lin Chi, 2020. "A Game Theory Approach for Assessment of Risk and Deployment of Police Patrols in Response to Criminal Activity in San Francisco," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(3), pages 534-549, March.
    10. Sylvain Béal & Stéphane Gonzalez & Philippe Solal & Peter Sudhölter, 2023. "Axiomatic characterizations of the core without consistency," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 52(3), pages 687-701, September.
    11. Gustavo Bergantiños & Juan D. Moreno-Ternero, 2022. "On the axiomatic approach to sharing the revenues from broadcasting sports leagues," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 58(2), pages 321-347, February.
    12. René Brink & Youngsub Chun, 2012. "Balanced consistency and balanced cost reduction for sequencing problems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 38(3), pages 519-529, March.
    13. Alex Gershkov & Paul Schweinzer, 2010. "When queueing is better than push and shove," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 39(3), pages 409-430, July.
    14. Fan Zhang & Pramode Verma, 2011. "Pricing multi-class network services using the Shapley Value," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 61-75, April.
    15. Ju, Yuan & Chun, Youngsub & van den Brink, René, 2014. "Auctioning and selling positions: A non-cooperative approach to queueing conflicts," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 33-45.
    16. Julio González-Díaz & Estela Sánchez-Rodríguez, 2014. "Understanding the coincidence of allocation rules: symmetry and orthogonality in TU-games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 43(4), pages 821-843, November.
    17. René Van Den Brink & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2023. "Degree Centrality, von Neumann-Morgenstern Expected Utility and Externalities in Networks," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 23012r, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne, revised Jun 2024.
    18. René Van Den Brink & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2023. "Degree Centrality, von Neumann-Morgenstern Expected Utility and Externalities in Networks," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 23012, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    19. Youngsub Chun & Manipushpak Mitra & Suresh Mutuswami, 2019. "Recent developments in the queueing problem," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 27(1), pages 1-23, April.
    20. van den Brink, René & Rusinowska, Agnieszka, 2022. "The degree measure as utility function over positions in graphs and digraphs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 299(3), pages 1033-1044.

    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:eee:infome:v:13:y:2019:i:1:p:87-104. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/joi .

    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.