IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i6p5003-d1094406.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Explaining the Paradox of World University Rankings in China: Higher Education Sustainability Analysis with Sentiment Analysis and LDA Topic Modeling

Author

Listed:
  • Yating Wen

    (School of Public Administration, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China)

  • Xiaodong Zhao

    (School of Public Administration, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China)

  • Xingguo Li

    (Higher Education Development Research Center, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China)

  • Yuqi Zang

    (School of Public Administration, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China)

Abstract

The development of the World University Rankings (WURs) has produced the following paradox. On the one hand, the WURs are often criticized for their ranking methodology and logic. On the other hand, the WURs are growing in influence worldwide. Universities are caught in a vicious cycle of pursuing indicators, which has a negative impact on the sustainability of higher education. In order to explain the development paradox of WURs, this research uses sentiment analysis and Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) topic modeling to understand how the WURs thrive amid controversy by analyzing the emotion and cognition in 18,466 Chinese public comments on the WURs. The research found that (1) although the Chinese public has mixed feelings about the WURs, the overall sentiment is positive; (2) the Chinese public perceives the WURs through four main perspectives: standpoint cognition, dialectical cognition, interest cognition, and cultural cognition; and (3) the public is more concerned about whether their standpoints are met, whether their interests are reflected, and whether their individual experiences are verified but rarely think about the problems of ranking from a dialectical perspective. The need for ranking has always existed but the issue of ranking has often been ignored, leading to the development paradox of rankings.

Suggested Citation

  • Yating Wen & Xiaodong Zhao & Xingguo Li & Yuqi Zang, 2023. "Explaining the Paradox of World University Rankings in China: Higher Education Sustainability Analysis with Sentiment Analysis and LDA Topic Modeling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:6:p:5003-:d:1094406
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/6/5003/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/6/5003/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ludo Waltman & Clara Calero‐Medina & Joost Kosten & Ed C.M. Noyons & Robert J.W. Tijssen & Nees Jan van Eck & Thed N. van Leeuwen & Anthony F.J. van Raan & Martijn S. Visser & Paul Wouters, 2012. "The Leiden ranking 2011/2012: Data collection, indicators, and interpretation," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(12), pages 2419-2432, December.
    2. Henk F. Moed, 2017. "A critical comparative analysis of five world university rankings," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(2), pages 967-990, February.
    3. Brian Pusser & Simon Marginson, 2013. "University Rankings in Critical Perspective," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 84(4), pages 544-568, July.
    4. Manuel Muñoz-Suárez & Natividad Guadalajara & José M. Osca, 2020. "A Comparative Analysis between Global University Rankings and Environmental Sustainability of Universities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-19, July.
    5. Millot, Benoit, 2015. "International rankings: Universities vs. higher education systems," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 156-165.
    6. Christoph Burmann & Fernando García & Francisco Guijarro & Javier Oliver, 2021. "Ranking the Performance of Universities: The Role of Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-16, November.
    7. Antonio Fernández-Cano & Elvira Curiel-Marin & Manuel Torralbo-Rodríguez & Mónica Vallejo-Ruiz, 2018. "Questioning the Shanghai Ranking methodology as a tool for the evaluation of universities: an integrative review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 2069-2083, September.
    8. Ludo Waltman & Clara Calero-Medina & Joost Kosten & Ed C.M. Noyons & Robert J.W. Tijssen & Nees Jan Eck & Thed N. Leeuwen & Anthony F.J. Raan & Martijn S. Visser & Paul Wouters, 2012. "The Leiden ranking 2011/2012: Data collection, indicators, and interpretation," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(12), pages 2419-2432, December.
    9. Jill Johnes, 2018. "University rankings: What do they really show?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 585-606, April.
    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. Zahyah H. Alharbi, 2023. "A Sustainable Price Prediction Model for Airbnb Listings Using Machine Learning and Sentiment Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-19, 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. Annamaria Demarinis Loiotile & Francesco De Nicolò & Adriana Agrimi & Loredana Bellantuono & Marianna La Rocca & Alfonso Monaco & Ester Pantaleo & Sabina Tangaro & Nicola Amoroso & Roberto Bellotti, 2022. "Best Practices in Knowledge Transfer: Insights from Top Universities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-23, November.
    2. Cinzia Daraio & Simone Di Leo & Loet Leydesdorff, 2022. "Using the Leiden Rankings as a Heuristics: Evidence from Italian universities in the European landscape," LEM Papers Series 2022/08, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    3. Fernando García & Francisco Guijarro & Javier Oliver, 2021. "A Multicriteria Goal Programming Model for Ranking Universities," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-17, February.
    4. Zorica Lazić & Aleksandar Đorđević & Albina Gazizulina, 2021. "Improvement of Quality of Higher Education Institutions as a Basis for Improvement of Quality of Life," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-27, April.
    5. Massucci, Francesco Alessandro & Docampo, Domingo, 2019. "Measuring the academic reputation through citation networks via PageRank," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 185-201.
    6. Vicente Safón, 2019. "Inter-ranking reputational effects: an analysis of the Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) and the Times Higher Education World University Rankings (THE) reputational relationship," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(2), pages 897-915, November.
    7. Hoekman, Jarno & Rake, Bastian, 2024. "Geography of authorship: How geography shapes authorship attribution in big team science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(2).
    8. Marco Cavallaro & Benedetto Lepori, 2021. "Institutional barriers to participation in EU framework programs: contrasting the Swiss and UK cases," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1311-1328, February.
    9. Ying Guo & Xiantao Xiao, 2022. "Author-level altmetrics for the evaluation of Chinese scholars," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(2), pages 973-990, February.
    10. Jeffrey Demaine, 2022. "Fractionalization of research impact reveals global trends in university collaboration," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2235-2247, May.
    11. Csató, László & Tóth, Csaba, 2020. "University rankings from the revealed preferences of the applicants," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 286(1), pages 309-320.
    12. Leporia, Benedetto & Geuna, Aldo & Mira, Antonietta, 2018. "Scientific Output of US and European Universities Scales Super-linearly with Resources," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201806, University of Turin.
    13. Shahryar Rahnamayan & Sedigheh Mahdavi & Kalyanmoy Deb & Azam Asilian Bidgoli, 2020. "Ranking Multi-Metric Scientific Achievements Using a Concept of Pareto Optimality," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-46, June.
    14. Lavinia Mustea, 2022. "An Overview of Public Sector Performance in Europe," Ovidius University Annals, Economic Sciences Series, Ovidius University of Constantza, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 0(1), pages 339-345, September.
    15. Csóka, Imola & Sebestyén, Géza & Neszveda, Gábor, 2019. "Tudományos teljesítmény mérése a magyar felsőoktatás gazdasági képzéseiben [Measuring scientific performance of business and economics faculties in Hungarian higher education]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(7), pages 751-770.
    16. Lutz Bornmann, 2020. "Bibliometrics-based decision tree (BBDT) for deciding whether two universities in the Leiden ranking differ substantially in their performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(2), pages 1255-1258, February.
    17. Lutz Bornmann & Werner Marx & Andreas Barth, 2013. "The Normalization of Citation Counts Based on Classification Systems," Publications, MDPI, vol. 1(2), pages 1-9, August.
    18. Fabio S. V. Silva & Peter A. Schulz & Everard C. M. Noyons, 2019. "Co-authorship networks and research impact in large research facilities: benchmarking internal reports and bibliometric databases," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(1), pages 93-108, January.
    19. Klaus Wohlrabe & Sabine Gralka & Lutz Bornmann, 2019. "Zur Effizienz deutscher Universitäten und deren Entwicklung zwischen 2004 und 2015," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 72(21), pages 15-21, November.
    20. Loet Leydesdorff & Lutz Bornmann & Jonathan Adams, 2019. "The integrated impact indicator revisited (I3*): a non-parametric alternative to the journal impact factor," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(3), pages 1669-1694, June.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:6:p:5003-:d:1094406. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.