Abstract
Since bibliometric indicators have obtained a general acceptance in science policy and attained applied relevance in research evaluation, feedback effects on scientists’ behaviour resulting from the use of these indicators for science funding decisions have been reported. These adaptation strategies could be called mimicry in science. Scientists apply strategies that should enable them to comply to bibliometric accountability and to secure funds to their own research.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H.-D. (2007). Multiple publication on a single research study: Does it pay? The influence of number of research articles on total citation counts in biomedicine. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(8), 1100–1107.
Bornmann, L., Leydesdorff, L., & Marx, W. (2007). Citation environment of Angewandte Chemie. CHIMIA, 61(3), 104–109.
Butler, L. (2003). Modifying publication practices in response to funding formulas. Research Evaluation, 12(1), 39–46.
Butler, L. (2004). What happens when funding is linked to publication counts? In H. F. Moed, W. Glänzel, & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research. The use of publication and patent statistics in studies of S&T systems (pp. 389–405). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
de Solla Price, D. J. (1965). Little science, big science. New York, NY, USA: Columbia University Press.
Evidence Ltd. (2007). The use of bibliometrics to measure research quality in UK higher education institutions. London, UK: Universities UK.
Fraser, V. J., & Martin, J. G. (2009). Marketing data: Has the rise of impact factor led to the fall of objective language in the scientific article? Respiratory Research, 10, 35.
Gilbert, N. (2006). The death of peer review. Retrieved March 8, 2010, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2006/dec/12/researchassessmentexercise.research.
Gläser, J., & Laudel, G. (2007). Evaluation without evoluators. The impact of funding formulae on Australian university research. In R. Whitley & J. Gläser (Eds.), The changing governance of the sciences (pp. 127–151). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Jimenez-Contreras, E., Delgado Lopez-Cozar, E., Ruiz-Perez, R., & Fernandez, V. M. (2002). Impact-factor rewards affect Spanish research. Nature, 417(6892), 898.
Laloë, F., & Mosseri, R. (2009). Bibliometric evaluation of individual researchers: Not even right… not even wrong!. Europhysics News, 40(5), 26–29.
Lawrence, P. A. (2003). The politics of publication. Authors, reviewers and editors must act to protect the quality of research. Nature, 422(6929), 259–261.
Macilwain, C. (2010). Wild goose chase. Nature, 463(7279), 291.
Martinson, B. C., Anderson, M. S., Crain, A. L., & de Vries, R. (2006). Scientists’ perceptions of organizational justice and self-reported misbehaviors. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 1(1), 51–66.
Merton, R. K. (1938). Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review, 3(5), 672–682.
Mervis, J. (2007). U.S. output flattens, and NSF wonders why. Science, 317(5838), 582.
Moed, H. (2008). UK research assessment exercises: Informed judgments on research quality or quantity? Scientometrics, 74(1), 153–161.
National Science Board. (2010). Science and engineering indicators 2010, Arlington, VA, USA, National Science Foundation (NSB 10-01).
Patent, D. H. (1978). Animal and plant mimicry. New York, NY, USA: Holiday House.
Qiu, J. (2010). Publish or perish in China. The pressure to rack up publications in high-impact journals could encourage misconduct, some say. Nature, 463, 142–143.
Research Evaluation and Policy Project. (2005). Quantitative indicators for research assessment—a literature review (REPP discussion paper 05/1). Canberra, Australia: Research Evaluation and Policy Project, Research School of Social Sciences, The Australian National University.
Rey, J., Martin, M. J., Plaza, L., Ibanez, J. J., & Mendez, I. (1998). Changes on publishing behavior in response to research policy guidelines. The case of the Spanish Research Council in the field of agronomy. Scientometrics, 41(1–2), 101–111.
Rodríguez-Ruiz, Ó. (2009). The citation indexes and the quantification of knowledge. Journal of Educational Administration, 47(2), 250–266.
Schneider, J. W. (2009). An outline of the bibliometric indicator used for performance-based funding of research institutions in Norway. European Political Science, 8(3), 364–378.
Testa, J. (2010). The Thomson Reuters journal selection process. Retrieved February 19, 2010, from http://isiwebofknowledge.com/benefits/essays/journalselection/.
UK Office of Science and Technology. (2006). Science and innovation investment framework 2004–2014: Next steps. London: UK Office of Science and Technology.
Weingart, P. (2005). Impact of bibliometrics upon the science system: Inadvertent consequences? Scientometrics, 62(1), 117–131.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bornmann, L. Mimicry in science?. Scientometrics 86, 173–177 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0222-8
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0222-8