IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v6y1996i1p53-61.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social studies of the humanities: a case study of research conditions and performance in ancient history and classical archaeology, and English

Author

Listed:
  • Sven Hemlin

Abstract

Research conditions and production in two humanistic disciplines — ancient history and classical archaeology (AHLA), and English are described and compared. A theoretical framework from research evaluation studies which emphasised mediating process factors in conjunction with input factors to explain research output was applied. Results of a questionnaire and interviews showed that the production of publications was generally larger in AHLA than English. The Pearson correlations between the number of researchers and publications and the number of PhD degrees were moderate and high, respectively, in AHLA. In English, both correlation figures were lower. Common features of the two disciplines were a cosmopolitical direction, similar publication profiles and research quality conceptions. Distinguishing factors were related to theoretical, working style and organisational conditions which may have influenced productivity differences. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Sven Hemlin, 1996. "Social studies of the humanities: a case study of research conditions and performance in ancient history and classical archaeology, and English," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 53-61, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:6:y:1996:i:1:p:53-61
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/rev/6.1.53
    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. Anthony J. Nederhof & Marc Luwel & Henk F. Moed, 2001. "Assessing the quality of scholarly journals in Linguistics:An alternative to citation-based journal impact factors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 51(1), pages 241-265, April.

    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:6:y:1996:i:1:p:53-61. 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.