IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v10y2001i2p105-113.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Selection of databases, indicators and models for evaluating research performance of Chinese universities

Author

Listed:
  • Liming Liang
  • Yishan Wu

Abstract

Both report-based and derived databases are currently used in the evaluation exercises of Chinese universities. To examine their respective reliability, the stratification structures of medical universities are compared. SCI, Chinese Scientific and Technical Papers and Citations (CSTPC) and Chinese Science Citation Database (CSCD) are all derived databases that are widely used in the evaluation of research performance of Chinese universities. What are the differences among these three databases? How important is the indicator of publication count in comparison with the quality or impact indicators? What mathematical model could better describe the rank-frequency distribution of given evaluation indicators among universities? This paper tries to answer these questions. Extended negative exponential function proves to be an appropriate model to fit the rank-frequency distribution here. A multi-equivalent comprehensive indicator is built and used to rank universities according to their research performance. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Liming Liang & Yishan Wu, 2001. "Selection of databases, indicators and models for evaluating research performance of Chinese universities," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 105-113, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:10:y:2001:i:2:p:105-113
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154401781777042
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Henk F. Moed, 2002. "Measuring China"s research performance using the Science Citation Index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 53(3), pages 281-296, March.
    2. Bihui Jin & Jiangong Zhang & Dingquan Chen & Xianyou Zhu, 2002. "Development of the Chinese Scientometric Indicators (CSI)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 54(1), pages 145-154, April.
    3. Jia Zhu & Saeed-Ul Hassan & Hamid Turab Mirza & Qing Xie, 2014. "Measuring recent research performance for Chinese universities using bibliometric methods," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 429-443, October.
    4. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.

    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:oup:rseval:v:10:y:2001:i:2:p:105-113. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    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.