Monday, 11 September 2017

Research Impact Measures · University of Minnesota Libraries


Research Impact Measures · University of Minnesota Libraries

Explore some of the most commonly-accepted measures currently used:

You’ll find tips on how to find and calculate these measures,
guidance on the strengths and weaknesses of the data, a context for
using the

tools, and an understanding of what the numbers actually report.

The favored trend employs measures based on citations because they
are relatively easy-to-gather, objective data that may indicate a
publication's contribution to further research. Deeper investigation
reveals complexities in how these measures are calculated and the
difficulties of comparing across disciplines that have different
research and publication practices.

The ramifications of research may be diverse, wide-ranging, and
long-term, and therefore intrinsically hard to measure. The current,
competing measures of research impact highlighted in these pages are
understandably imperfect. Care should be taken in understanding their
merits and limitations.

Further Reading

Science Metrics, a Nature News special issue (6/16/10) discussing various individual productivity measures.

"Why the Impact Factor of Journals Should not be Used for Evaluating Research" by P. O. Seglen (1997) in the British Medical Journal.

"Comparisons of Citations in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for Articles Published in General Medical Journals"
by Kulkarni, Abhaya V.; Aziz, Brittany; Shams, Iffat; Busse, Jason W.
JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 9/9/2009, Vol. 302
Issue 10, p1092-1096.

Research Impact Measures · University of Minnesota Libraries

No comments:

Post a Comment