IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdp/texdis/td569.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Academic rankings and pluralism : the case of Brazil and the new version of Qualis

Author

Listed:
  • Ian Coelho de Souza Almeida

    (Cedeplar-UFMG)

  • Rafael Galvão de Almeida

    (Cedeplar-UFMG)

  • Lucas Resende de Carvalho

    (Cedeplar-UFMG)

Abstract

The paper approaches the theme of the relatively higher level of pluralism in Brazilian economics, when compared to the other countries, from a different approach used in the literature. Considering the Qualis as an instrument of great impact in the research of the Brazilian graduate education centers, mainly because of its impact in the CAPES evaluation of the centers, we analyze the abrupt change in the journal ranking that occurred in 2016. Before presenting this data, we first focused in understanding the metrics that are part of the Qualis, and how relevant the biases from other indexes than the Impact Factor are. Afterwards, we present a review of the national literature concerning the academic production in economics, showing how some problems due to incentives and structure still persist. We, then, present our results: we found out that the increase of journals in the higher strata of the Qualis without a research agenda bias, and with a great inclusion of specialized sub-fields of the discipline. Besides, the impact that this change will cause in the 2017 CAPES’ evaluation cannot be seen as favoring centers by their division in mainstream and non-mainstream. Having this in mind, we argue that the modifications keep incentives to pluralism, besides correcting many problems in the ranking.

Suggested Citation

  • Ian Coelho de Souza Almeida & Rafael Galvão de Almeida & Lucas Resende de Carvalho, 2017. "Academic rankings and pluralism : the case of Brazil and the new version of Qualis," Textos para Discussão Cedeplar-UFMG 569, Cedeplar, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais.
    • Handle: RePEc:cdp:texdis:td569
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cedeplar.ufmg.br/pesquisas/td/TD%20569.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joao Ricardo Faria, 2000. "The Research Output of Academic Economists in Brazil," Working Paper Series 100, Finance Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney.
    2. Frederic S. Lee, 2007. "The Research Assessment Exercise, the state and the dominance of mainstream economics in British universities," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 31(2), pages 309-325, March.
    3. Wolfgang Glänzel & Henk F. Moed, 2002. "Journal impact measures in bibliometric research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 53(2), pages 171-193, February.
    4. Issler, João Victor & Ferreira, Rachel Couto, 2003. "Avaliando pesquisadores e departamentos de economia no Brasil a partir de citações internacionais," FGV EPGE Economics Working Papers (Ensaios Economicos da EPGE) 500, EPGE Brazilian School of Economics and Finance - FGV EPGE (Brazil).
    5. Judit Bar-Ilan, 2008. "Which h-index? — A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 74(2), pages 257-271, February.
    6. Anne-Wil Harzing & Satu Alakangas, 2016. "Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: a longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(2), pages 787-804, February.
    7. Adriano Codato & Marco Cavalieri & Renato Perissinotto & Eric Gil Dantas, 2016. "Economic mainstream and power: a profile analysis of Central Bank directors during PSDB and PT governments in Brazil [Economic mainstream and power: a profile analysis of Central Bank directors during," Nova Economia, Economics Department, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (Brazil), vol. 26(3), pages 687-720, September.
    8. Mario Cedrini & Magda Fontana, 2018. "Just another niche in the wall? How specialization is changing the face of mainstream economics [Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, transdisciplinarity, and the sciences]," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 42(2), pages 427-451.
    9. Maria Bordons & M. T. Fernández & Isabel Gómez, 2002. "Advantages and limitations in the use of impact factor measures for the assessment of research performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 53(2), pages 195-206, February.
    10. novaes, Walter, 2008. "The Economics Research in Brazil: An empirical Study of the Trade-off Between Quantity and Quality," Revista Brasileira de Economia - RBE, EPGE Brazilian School of Economics and Finance - FGV EPGE (Brazil), vol. 62(4), December.
    11. Walter Novaes, 2007. "A Pesquisa em Economia no Brasil: Uma avaliação empírica dos conflitos entre quantidade e qualidade," Textos para discussão 553, Department of Economics PUC-Rio (Brazil).
    12. Jakob Kapeller & Matthias Aistleitner & Stefan Steinerberger, 2017. "Citation Patterns in Economics and Beyond: Assessing the Peculiarities of Economics from Two Scientometric Perspectives," ICAE Working Papers 60, Johannes Kepler University, Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy.
    13. Frederic S. Lee & Bruce C. Cronin & Scott McConnell & Erik Dean, 2010. "Research Quality Rankings of Heterodox Economic Journals in a Contested Discipline," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(5), pages 1409-1452, November.
    14. Issler, João Victor & Pillar, Tatiana Caldas de Lima Aché, 2002. "Mensurando a produção científica internacional em economia de pesquisadores e departamentos brasileiros," FGV EPGE Economics Working Papers (Ensaios Economicos da EPGE) 454, EPGE Brazilian School of Economics and Finance - FGV EPGE (Brazil).
    15. Anne‐Wil Harzing & Ron van der Wal, 2009. "A Google Scholar h‐index for journals: An alternative metric to measure journal impact in economics and business," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(1), pages 41-46, January.
    16. Leonhard Dobusch & Jakob Kapeller, 2009. "Diskutieren und Zitieren: Zur paradigmatischen Konstellation aktueller oekonomischer Theorie," European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 6(2), pages 145-152.
    17. Christopher Barrett & Aliakbar Olia & Dee Von Bailey, 2000. "Subdiscipline-specific journal rankings: whither Applied Economics?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(2), pages 239-252.
    18. Rafols, Ismael & Leydesdorff, Loet & O’Hare, Alice & Nightingale, Paul & Stirling, Andy, 2012. "How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1262-1282.
    19. Tibor Braun & Wolfgang Glänzel & András Schubert, 2006. "A Hirsch-type index for journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 69(1), pages 169-173, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Fabio Gomes Rocha & Rosimeri Ferraz Sabino & Alejandro C. Frery, 2020. "Analysis of the international impact of the Brazilian base “Qualis”-Education," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 1949-1963, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Eduardo A. Haddad & Jesus P. Mena-Chalco, Otávio J.G. Sidone, 2016. "Produção Científica e Redes de Colaboração dos Docentes Vinculados aos Programas de Pós-graduação em Economia no Brasil," Working Papers, Department of Economics 2016_10, University of São Paulo (FEA-USP).
    2. Waltman, Ludo, 2016. "A review of the literature on citation impact indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 365-391.
    3. Mingkun Wei, 2020. "Research on impact evaluation of open access journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(2), pages 1027-1049, February.
    4. Tingcan Ma & Gui-Fang Wang & Ke Dong & Mukun Cao, 2012. "The Journal’s Integrated Impact Index: a new indicator for journal evaluation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(2), pages 649-658, February.
    5. Mingers, John & Yang, Liying, 2017. "Evaluating journal quality: A review of journal citation indicators and ranking in business and management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 257(1), pages 323-337.
    6. Chagas , André Luis Squarize, 2017. "Publish or Perish: um ranking de revistas da subárea de Economia Regional e Urbana para os pesquisadores brasileiros," Revista Brasileira de Estudos Regionais e Urbanos, Associação Brasileira de Estudos Regionais e Urbanos (ABER), vol. 11(4), pages 515-536.
    7. Halevi, Gali & Moed, Henk & Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2017. "Suitability of Google Scholar as a source of scientific information and as a source of data for scientific evaluation—Review of the Literature," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 823-834.
    8. Michel Zitt, 2012. "The journal impact factor: angel, devil, or scapegoat? A comment on J.K. Vanclay’s article 2011," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(2), pages 485-503, August.
    9. Mingyang Wang & Shijia Jiao & Kah-Hin Chai & Guangsheng Chen, 2019. "Building journal’s long-term impact: using indicators detected from the sustained active articles," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 261-283, October.
    10. Guimaraes, Bernardo, 2011. "Qualis as a measuring stick for research output in Economics," Brazilian Review of Econometrics, Sociedade Brasileira de Econometria - SBE, vol. 31(1), March.
    11. Ziqiang Zeng & Lantian Shi, 2021. "A two-dimensional journal classification method based on output and input factors: perspectives from citation and authorship related indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(5), pages 3929-3964, May.
    12. Ferenc Moksony & Rita Hegedűs & Melinda Császár, 2014. "Rankings, research styles, and publication cultures: a study of American sociology departments," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(3), pages 1715-1729, December.
    13. Rosenthal, Edward C. & Weiss, Howard J., 2017. "A data envelopment analysis approach for ranking journals," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 135-147.
    14. Alonso, S. & Cabrerizo, F.J. & Herrera-Viedma, E. & Herrera, F., 2009. "h-Index: A review focused in its variants, computation and standardization for different scientific fields," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 273-289.
    15. Vivek Kumar Singh & Prashasti Singh & Mousumi Karmakar & Jacqueline Leta & Philipp Mayr, 2021. "The journal coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A comparative analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 5113-5142, June.
    16. Geert Campenhout & Tom Caneghem & Steve Uytbergen, 2008. "A comparison of overall and sub-area journal influence: The case of the accounting literature," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 77(1), pages 61-90, October.
    17. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Flavia Di Costa, 2010. "Citations versus journal impact factor as proxy of quality: could the latter ever be preferable?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(3), pages 821-833, September.
    18. Ana Batlles-delaFuente & Luis Jesús Belmonte-Ureña & José Antonio Plaza-Úbeda & Emilio Abad-Segura, 2021. "Sustainable Business Model in the Product-Service System: Analysis of Global Research and Associated EU Legislation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-33, September.
    19. Parul Khurana & Kiran Sharma, 2022. "Impact of h-index on author’s rankings: an improvement to the h-index for lower-ranked authors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4483-4498, August.
    20. Judit Bar-Ilan, 2012. "Journal report card," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(2), pages 249-260, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Qualis; academic production; pluralism; bibliometrics; mainstream economics; heterodox economics;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A23 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics - - - Graduate
    • A14 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Sociology of Economics
    • B00 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - General - - - History of Economic Thought, Methodology, and Heterodox Approaches

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cdp:texdis:td569. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Gustavo Britto (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/pufmgbr.html .

    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.