IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v27y2018i4p323-334..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of research in the arts: Evidence from Poland

Author

Listed:
  • Kamila Lewandowska
  • Paweł Mirosław Stano

Abstract

Art studies, as an academic discipline, is an under-researched topic, especially with reference to science evaluation. Yet, it is a particularly interesting field to study given that it does not easily fit into the ‘science’ category. Our analysis centres on the core element of the evaluation system: scientific journals in the field of arts. We compare the rank of the journals with their disciplinary coverage and methodological orientation, to identify what kind of research approaches are most encouraged by the system of research funding. Our results show that journals in the field of arts have higher odds of being highly ranked if (1) their scope is diversified and combines art studies with explanatory sciences and (2) they publish empirically oriented research on the arts. Our findings suggest that the analysis of research evaluation systems should take into account not only interdisciplinary differences but also differences between particular types of research (within a given discipline).

Suggested Citation

  • Kamila Lewandowska & Paweł Mirosław Stano, 2018. "Evaluation of research in the arts: Evidence from Poland," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(4), pages 323-334.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:27:y:2018:i:4:p:323-334.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvy021
    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.

    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:27:y:2018:i:4:p:323-334.. 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.