Abstract
Taking up work done by other partners in EERQI and more specifically the quality indicators identified we tried to establish a significant correlation between these intrinsic quality indicators and available extrinsic indicators (bibliometric, webometric and usage indicators, including new resources from the 'social web'). Although the data used were partly incomplete and fragmentary in some respect testing of uni-variate and linear correlations was not successful and any correlation one could imagine would probably be non-linear and complex. As a consequence, the most plausible conclusion for the time being seems to assume complementarity rather than correlation of intrinsic and extrinsic indicators of research publication quality.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Bollen, J., 2010. The MESUR project: an overview and update. Available at: http://www.sparceurope.org/news/AAR_JB_MESUR_project_overview_update.pdf/view
Bornman, L., Mutz, R. & Daniel, H.-D., 2007. Gender differences in grant peer review: A meta-analysis. Journal of Infometrics, (1), pp. 226–238.
Bornmann, L., 2008. Scientific peer review. An analysis of the peer review process from the perspective of sociology of science theories. Human Architture: Journal of the Sociology of Self-Knowledge, 6(2), pp. 23–38.
Bourne, P. & Fink, J., 2008. I Am Not a Scientist, I Am a Number. PLoS Comput Biol, 4(12).
Bridges, D., 2009. Research quality assessment in education: impossible science, possible art? British Educational Research Journal, 35(4), pp. 497–517.
Bridges, D. & Gogolin, I., 2011. The Process of Development of „Intrinsic Indicators†. In EERQI Final Conference, Brussels, 15th–16thMarch 2011.
Burgelman, J.-C., Osimo, D. & Bogdanowicz, M., 2010. Science 2.0 (change will happen… .). First Monday, 15(7). Available at: http://www.uic.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2961/2573.
Cicchetti, D., 1991. The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submission. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1(14), pp. 119–186.
Cronin, B., 2001. Bibliometrics and beyond: some thoughts on web-based citation analysis. Journal of Information Science, 27(1), pp.1-7. Available at: http://jis.sagepub.com/content/27/1/1.full.pdf+html.
Duong, K., 2010. Rolling out Zotero across campus as a part of a science librarian’s outreach efforts. Science & Technology Libraries, 29(4), pp. 315–324.
EERQI Project Final Report, 2011 Hamburg. Available at: http://eerqi.eu/sites/default/files/Final_Report.pdf#page=9.
Egghe, L., 2006. Theory and practise of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69(1), pp.131–152. Available at: http://www.springerlink.com/content/4119257t25h0852w/fulltext.pdf.
Gilmour, R. & Cobus-Kuo, L., 2011. Reference Management Software: A comparative analysis of four products. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship. Available at: http://www.istl.org/11-summer/refereed2.html#9 [Accessed January 23, 2012].
Hornbostel, S., 1991. “Drittmitteleinwerbungen. Ein Indikator für universitäre For-schungsleistungen?” Beiträge zur Hochschulforschung, (1), pp. 57–84.
Hornbostel, S., 2001. “Third party funding of German universities. An indicator of re-search activity?” Scientometrics, 50(3), pp. 523–53.
Hull, D., Pettifer, S.R. & Kell, D.B., 2008. Defrosting the digital library: bibliographic tools for the next generation web. J. McEntyre, ed. PLoS computational biology, 4(10), p.e1000204. Available at: http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000204.
Kolowich, S., 2010. New Measures of Scholarly Impact. Inside Higher Ed. Available at: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/12/17/scholars_develop_new_metrics_for_journals_impact.
Kousha, K. & Thelwall, M., 2007. Google Scholar citations and Google Web/URL citations: A multi-discipline exploratory analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(7), pp.1055–1065. Available at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.20584/full.
Mead, T.L. & Berryman, D.R., 2010. Reference and PDF-manager software: complexities, support and workflow. Medical Reference Services Quarterly, 29(4), pp. 388–393.
Moed, H., 2005. The future of research evaluation rests with an intelligent combination of advanced metrics and transparent peer review. Science and Public Policy, 34(8), pp. 575–583.
Norris, M. & Oppenheim, C., 2003. Citation counts and the Research Assessment Exercise V: Archaeology and the 2001 RAE. Journal of Documentation, 59(6), pp. 709–730.
Priem, J. & Hemminger, B., 2010. Scientometrics 2.0: New metrics of scholarly impact on the social Web. First Monday, 15(7). Available at: http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2874/2570.
Qiu, J., 2008. Scientific publishing: Identity crisis. Nature, 451, pp.766-767. Available at: http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080213/full/451766a.html.
Ruths, D. & Al Zamal, F., 2010. A Method for the Automated, Reliable Retrieval of Publication-Citation Records. PLoS One, 5(8). Available at: http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0012133.
Rynes, S.L. & Brown, K.G., 2011. Where Are We in the “Long March to Legitimacy?” Assessing Scholarship in Management Learning and Education . Learning and Education, 10(4), pp.1-55. Available at: http://www.aom.pace.edu/InPress/main.asp?action=preview&art_id=947&p_id=2&p_short=AMLE.
Smith, A. & Eysenck, M., 2002. The correlation between RAE ratings and citation counts in psychology. Available at: http://cogprints.org/2749/.
Stoye, D. & Sieber, J., 2010. Description of aMeasure: Measuring extrinsic quality indicators in educational research publications EERQI report, Berlin. Available at: http://edoc.hu-berlin.de/oa/reports/reJ3Xv4PJ82ZM/PDF/29B6vgnyGba6.pdf.
Thelwall, M., 2008. Bibliometrics to webometrics. Journal of Information Science, 34(4), pp. 605–621.
Thelwall, M., 2003. Web use and peer interconnectivity metrics for academic web sites. Journal of Information Science, 29(1), pp. 1–10.
The use of bibliometrics to measure research quality in UK higher education institutions, 2007 London. Available at: http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/Publications/Documents/bibliometrics.pdf.
Williamson, A., 2003. What will happen to peer review? Learned Publishing, 16(1), pp.15-20. Available at: http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgibin/cgi?ini=xref&body=linker&reqdoi=10.1087/095315103320995041.
Wolfe Thompson, J., 2002. The Death of the Scholarly Monograph in the Humanities? Citation Patterns in Literary Scholarship. Libri, 52, pp.121–136. Available at: http://www.librijournal.org/pdf/2002-3pp121-136.pdf.
Wolinsky, H., 2008. What’s in a name? EMBO reports, 9, pp.1171-117. Available at: http://www.nature.com/embor/journal/v9/n12/full/embor2008217.html.
Xuemei, L., Thelwall, M. & Giustini, D., 2011. Validating online reference managers for scholarly impact measurement. Scientometrics, 89(3), pp. 1–11.
Zhang, C.-T., 2009. The e-Index, Complementing the h-Index for Excess Citations. PLoS ONE, 4(5). Available at: http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0005429.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gradmann, S., Havemann, F., Oltersdorf, J. (2014). Studies in Correlative Assessing of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Indicators of Quality. In: Gogolin, I., Åström, F., Hansen, A. (eds) Assessing Quality in European Educational Research. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-05969-9_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-05969-9_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden
Print ISBN: 978-3-658-05968-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-658-05969-9
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)