IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v34y2025i1p250-62..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How do decision-makers in academic promotion perceive the novel scientometric evaluation in Egypt?

Author

Listed:
  • Mona Farouk Ali

Abstract

Research evaluation (RE) has experienced a major global transformation prompted by the emergence and increasing usage of digital citation platforms such as the Web of Science and Scopus, opening up avenues for scientometric evaluation (SE). This relatively novel evaluation method represents an essential pillar for the scientific committees for promotion in Egypt. Following previous recommendations to scrutinize RE systems in their sociocultural contexts, this study attempted to understand the SE perceptions held by these committees’ decision-makers. The study questionnaire was designed to incorporate all factors influencing SE perception and the characteristics of the chairpersons and their committees. Approximately 94% of respondents expressed positive SE perception, suggesting this evaluation’s success and continued use. The significant differences between responses explored were attributed to the international scientific performance of the chairpersons and most of the committees’ characteristics, including specialization and publication pattern and language. Despite the positive trend, some results indicated a degree of resistance to the new evaluation method, particularly in the social sciences, including the arts and humanities. The findings should interest evaluators and policy analysts in the Egyptian higher education and scientific research sector and other countries striving to internationalize this sector and improve the climate of research integrity. Comparable investigations can also utilize the reviewed and validated study instrument.

Suggested Citation

  • Mona Farouk Ali, 2025. "How do decision-makers in academic promotion perceive the novel scientometric evaluation in Egypt?," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(1), pages 250-262.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:34:y:2025:i:1:p:250-62.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvae062
    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:34:y:2025:i:1:p:250-62.. 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.