Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Survey on Legal Research Monograph Evaluation in Italy

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Evaluation of Research in Social Sciences and Humanities

Abstract

The chapter presents an original survey carried out in 2015 on legal research monographs evaluation. The target respondents were the Italian legal community. The rate of answers was quite high (taking into account a low level of national responses to mail or web surveys), reaching 26% of all professors and researchers. The survey examines in detail the criteria of research quality adopted by legal scholars. It also delivers a number of recommendations with respect to peer review, journal classification, and other evaluation practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    www.anvur.org

  2. 2.

    Call of the Valutazione della Qualità della Ricerca 2004–2010 (VQR 2004–2010) http://www.anvur.org/attachments/article/122/bando_vqr_def_07_11.pdf

  3. 3.

    Call of the Valutazione della Qualità della Ricerca 2011–2014 (VQR 2011–2014) http://www.anvur.org/attachments/article/825/Bando%20VQR%202011-2014_secon~.pdf

  4. 4.

    The first two countries have been chosen for their long-standing experience in the science of the quality of research evaluation, France for the similarity with the Italian context.

  5. 5.

    An example is the Scholarly Publishers’ Indicators (SPI) initiative of the Spanish National Research Council (CSIC). It is an information system that tracks a ranking of publishers (Spanish and otherwise), of scientific books in the areas of humanities and social sciences. http://ilia.cchs.csic.es/SPI

  6. 6.

    http://www.unige.ch/droit/cetel/recherches/evalRecherche.html

  7. 7.

    Professors’ website – loginmiur: https://loginmiur.cineca.it/

References

  • Baccini, A. (2010). Valutare la ricerca scientifica. Uso e abuso degli indicatori bibliometrici. Bologna: Il Mulino.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carinci, F., & Brollo, M. (Eds.). (2013). Abilitazione scientifica per i professori universitari: Legge n. 240/2010 e decretazione attuativa. Milan: IPSOA.

    Google Scholar 

  • CASAG- Conferenza italiana delle associazioni scientifiche di area giuridica. (2014). Parere sull’uso degli indicatori bibliometrici per la valutazione in ambito giuridico. http://www.associazionedeicostituzionalisti.it/download/Jvy0AePS84owLDwij3bSn07t0n6ZcqEYKVqDd4Ljuxk/casagparere-indicatori-bibliometrici-a.pdf

  • Chodorow, S. (1999). Specialized scholarly monograph in crisis or how can I get tenure if you won’t publish my book? Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries.

    Google Scholar 

  • Consiglio Universitario Nazionale. (2013). Proposta ‘Criteri identificanti il carattere scientifico delle pubblicazioni e degli altri prodotti della ricerca’, Prot. 22011 dated 24/10/2013. https://www.cun.it/uploads/4532/proposta_cun_criteri_scientificit%C3%A0.pdf?

  • Conte, G. (Ed.). (2015a). Evoluzione e valutazione della ricerca giuridica. Naples: ESI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conte, G. (2015b). Le reciproche interferenze tra evoluzione della ricerca giuridica e valutazione della medesima. In G. Conte (Ed.), Evoluzione e valutazione della ricerca giuridica (pp. 9–16). Naples: ESI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Raimo, R. (2015). la valutazione delle monografie nelle scienze sociali, secondo il sistema attuale. In G. Conte (Ed.), Evoluzione e valutazione della ricerca giuridica (pp. 241–252). Naples: ESI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, D. (2004). The four literatures of social science. In F. Moed et al. (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative scienceand technology research (pp. 473–496). Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osservatorio della Ricerca dell’Alma Mater Studiorum – Università di Bologna (OR). (2013). Definizione e principali criteri di valutazione dei prodotti della ricerca, giugno.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. W. (2002). The death of the scholarly monograph in the humanities? Citation patterns in literary scholarship. Libri, 52(3), 121–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. (2005). Books in the digital age: The transformation of academic and higher education publishing in Britain and the United States. Cambridge/Malden: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Gestel, R., & Micklitz, H.-W. (2011a). Revitalising doctrinal legal research in Europe: What about methodology? In U. Neergard & R. Nielsen (Eds.), European legal method-paradoxes and revitalisation. Copenhagen: Djof Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Gestel, R., & Micklitz, H.-W. (2011b). Why methods matter in European legal scholarship. European Law Journal, 20(3), 292–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Gestel, R., & Vranken, J. (2011). Assessing legal research: Sense and nonsense of peer review versus bibliometrics and the need for a European approach. German Law Journal, 12(3), 901–929.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watkinson, A. (2001). Electronic solutions to the problems of monograph publishing. London: The Council for Museums, Archives and Libraries.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Legal Information Theory and Techniques of the National Research Council of Italy (ITTIG-CNR), Florence, Italy

    Ginevra Peruginelli, Sebastiano Faro & Tommaso Agnoloni

Authors
  1. Ginevra Peruginelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sebastiano Faro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tommaso Agnoloni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ginevra Peruginelli .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. DESTEC, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy

    Andrea Bonaccorsi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Peruginelli, G., Faro, S., Agnoloni, T. (2018). A Survey on Legal Research Monograph Evaluation in Italy. In: Bonaccorsi, A. (eds) The Evaluation of Research in Social Sciences and Humanities. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68554-0_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68554-0_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-68553-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-68554-0

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation