IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v28y2019i2p169-181..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Field patterns of scientometric indicators use for presenting research portfolio for assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Emanuel Kulczycki

Abstract

This study investigates what names of metrics or databases researchers use to present their research portfolio and how their use is influenced by the field. I have analysed the data comprising 3,695 self-presentation documents (82,710 pages) from various academic promotion procedures in Poland. My study aims to determine the differences in the use of scientometrics indicators across all fields of science. I have used 21 codes (metrics and databases’ names) for coding all documents, analysed the patterns of scientometric indicators use, and found out that there is a significant relation between publication patterns and patterns of scientometric indicators use. My analyses reveal that researchers in ‘Hard Sciences’ (except for mathematics) very often use metrics to describe their output, researchers in ‘Soft Sciences’ (except for economics) only occasionally use metrics, and scholars from ‘Arts’ hardly ever use metrics. My most noteworthy finding highlights that patterns of scientometric indicators use are related to the publication patterns in the given field. I conclude with several recommendations for various research policies and show what metrics could be used and expected in promotion procedures in various fields.

Suggested Citation

  • Emanuel Kulczycki, 2019. "Field patterns of scientometric indicators use for presenting research portfolio for assessment," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(2), pages 169-181.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:28:y:2019:i:2:p:169-181.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvy043
    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. Zbigniew Koza & Robert Lew & Emanuel Kulczycki & Piotr Stec, 2023. "Who Controls the National Academic Promotion System: An Analysis of Power Distribution in Poland," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(2), pages 21582440231, May.
    2. Emanuel Kulczycki & Ying Huang & Alesia A. Zuccala & Tim C. E. Engels & Antonio Ferrara & Raf Guns & Janne Pölönen & Gunnar Sivertsen & Zehra Taşkın & Lin Zhang, 2022. "Uses of the Journal Impact Factor in national journal rankings in China and Europe," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(12), pages 1741-1754, December.
    3. Emanuel Kulczycki & Przemysław Korytkowski, 2020. "Researchers publishing monographs are more productive and more local-oriented," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(2), pages 1371-1387, November.

    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:28:y:2019:i:2:p:169-181.. 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.