IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/24224.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

University departments evaluation: a multivariate approach

Author

Listed:
  • Monacciani, Fabiana

Abstract

Aim of the paper is to present a new model, based on multivariate statistic analyses, allowing to express a synthetic judgement on Departments activities by taking into consideration the whole set of indicators describing them both as aggregations of researchers and as University autonomous organs. The model, based on Principal Component Analysis and Cluster Analysis, allows both to explain the determinants of Departments performances, and to classify them into homogeneous groups. The paper shows the results obtained by testing the proposed model on University of Naples “L’Orientale” Departments, using data extracted by the 2007 assessment report to the Ministry of University and Research.

Suggested Citation

  • Monacciani, Fabiana, 2010. "University departments evaluation: a multivariate approach," MPRA Paper 24224, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:24224
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/24224/1/MPRA_paper_24224.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Catherine Dehon & Alice McCathie & Vincenzo Verardi, 2010. "Uncovering excellence in academic rankings: a closer look at the Shanghai ranking," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 83(2), pages 515-524, May.
    2. Bruno S. Frey & Katja Rost, 2010. "Do rankings reflect research quality?," Journal of Applied Economics, Universidad del CEMA, vol. 13, pages 1-38, May.
    3. Henk F. Moed, 2008. "UK Research Assessment Exercises: Informed judgments on research quality or quantity?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 74(1), pages 153-161, January.
    4. J. Peter Neary & James A. Mirrlees & Jean Tirole, 2003. "Evaluating Economics Research in Europe: An Introduction," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(6), pages 1239-1249, December.
    5. Marco Lippi & Franco Peracchi, 2007. "Il primo esercizio italiano di valutazione della ricerca: una prima valutazione," Rivista italiana degli economisti, Società editrice il Mulino, issue 2, pages 267-276.
    6. Dahlia K. Remler & Elda Pema, 2009. "Why do Institutions of Higher Education Reward Research While Selling Education?," NBER Working Papers 14974, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. David A. King, 2004. "The scientific impact of nations," Nature, Nature, vol. 430(6997), pages 311-316, July.
    8. Maria Cristina Marcuzzo & Giulia Zacchia, 2007. "L'ECONLIT e gli strumenti per la valutazione della ricerca economica in Italia," Rivista italiana degli economisti, Società editrice il Mulino, issue 2, pages 277-306.
    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. Loredana VÄ‚CÄ‚RESCU HOBEANU, 2011. "The Management Of Scientific Research And Its Place In The University Activity," Journal of Applied Economic Sciences, Spiru Haret University, Faculty of Financial Management and Accounting Craiova, vol. 6(1(15)/ Sp), pages 85-99.

    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. Marcella Corsi & Carlo D'Ippoliti & Federico Lucidi, 2010. "Pluralism at Risk? Heterodox Economic Approaches and the Evaluation of Economic Research in Italy," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(5), pages 1495-1529, November.
    2. Huang, Ding-wei, 2016. "Positive correlation between quality and quantity in academic journals," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 329-335.
    3. Mikko Packalen & Jay Bhattacharya, 2017. "Neophilia ranking of scientific journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(1), pages 43-64, January.
    4. Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez & Cassidy R Sugimoto & Vincent Larivière, 2019. "Follow the leader: On the relationship between leadership and scholarly impact in international collaborations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-18, June.
    5. Giovanni Abramo & Francesca Apponi & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo, 2024. "Do research universities specialize in disciplines where they hold a competitive advantage?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(9), pages 5453-5468, September.
    6. Domingo Docampo & Lawrence Cram, 2019. "Highly cited researchers: a moving target," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 1011-1025, March.
    7. Müller, Harry, 2012. "Die Zitationshäufigkeit als Qualitätsindikator im Rahmen der Forschungsleistungsmessung," Discussion Papers of the Institute for Organisational Economics 1/2012, University of Münster, Institute for Organisational Economics.
    8. Amanda H Goodall, 2005. "Should Research Universities be Led by Top Researchers? Part 1: Are they?," HEW 0506003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Lawson, Cornelia & Geuna, Aldo & Ana Fernández-Zubieta & Toselli, Manuel & Kataishi, Rodrigo, 2015. "International Careers of Researchers in Biomedical Sciences: A Comparison of the US and the UK," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201514, University of Turin.
    10. Pentti Riikonen & Mauno Vihinen, 2008. "National research contributions: A case study on Finnish biomedical research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 77(2), pages 207-222, November.
    11. Jiang Wu, 2013. "Geographical knowledge diffusion and spatial diversity citation rank," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 181-201, January.
    12. Miguel Sarmiento, 2010. "Central Bank Economic Research: Output, Demand, Productivity, and Relevance," Money Affairs, CEMLA, vol. 0(2), pages 211-240, July-Dece.
    13. Yang Bai, 2018. "Has the Global South become a playground for Western scholars in information and communication technologies for development? Evidence from a three-journal analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 2139-2153, September.
    14. Patrick Herron & Aashish Mehta & Cong Cao & Timothy Lenoir, 2016. "Research diversification and impact: the case of national nanoscience development," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 629-659, November.
    15. Soutar, Geoffrey N. & Murphy, Jamie, 2009. "Journal quality: A Google Scholar analysis," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 150-153.
    16. Tuan V. Nguyen & Ly T. Pham, 2011. "Scientific output and its relationship to knowledge economy: an analysis of ASEAN countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(1), pages 107-117, October.
    17. Justus Haucap & Johannes Muck, 2015. "What drives the relevance and reputation of economics journals? An update from a survey among economists," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(3), pages 849-877, June.
    18. Anastassios Pouris, 2010. "A scientometric assessment of the Southern Africa Development Community: science in the tip of Africa," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(1), pages 145-154, October.
    19. de Oliveira, Thaiane Moreira & de Albuquerque, Sofia & Toth, Janderson Pereira & Bello, Debora Zava, 2018. "International cooperation networks of the BRICS bloc," SocArXiv b6x43, Center for Open Science.
    20. Rolf Ketzler & Klaus F. Zimmermann, 2009. "Publications: German economic research institutes on track," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(1), pages 231-252, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Evaluation; Departments; Multivariate statistics;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D0 - Microeconomics - - General
    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions
    • C19 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Other

    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:pra:mprapa:24224. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.