Advertisement

Diversity and Influence as Key Measures to Assess Candidates for Hiring or Promotion in Academia

  • Gabriela Jurca
  • Omar Addam
  • Jon Rokne
  • Reda AlhajjEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Social Networks book series (LNSN)

Abstract

Assessing candidates for academic positions or for promotion in academia is a challenging task with many variables to consider. Universities in general and departments in particular may prefer or emphasize diversity, quantity, quality, seniority, juniority, etc. Our case study focuses on the Department of Computer Science at the University of Calgary. Our target is to check how diversity and influence contribute to a department-centric look for hiring or promotion by producing a standard that a candidate may be measured against. We use social network analysis and community detection to measure the influence and diversity of department members. Another measure of diversity could be derived from the number of joint publications between authors and coauthors. The differences in these measures between various positions at the department (including instructors, assistant, associate and full professors) are presented and discussed.

Keywords

Bibliometrics Social network analysis Community detection Diversity Influence 

References

  1. 1.
    Bauldry, S.: Trends in the research productivity of newly hired assistant professors at research departments from 2007 to 2012. Am. Sociol. 44(3), 282–291 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Belter, C.W.: Bibliometric indicators: opportunities and limits. J. Med. Libr. Assoc. 103(4), 219 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., Daniel, H.D.: Are there better indices for evaluation purposes than the h index? A comparison of nine different variants of the h index using data from biomedicine. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 59(5), 830–837 (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Burris, V.: The academic caste system: prestige hierarchies in PhD exchange networks. Am. Sociol. Rev. 69(2), 239–264 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fox, M.F.: Publication productivity among scientists: a critical review. Soc. Stud. Sci. 13(2), 285–305 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hayes, J.L., King, K.W., Ramirez, A. Jr.: Brands, friends, & viral advertising: a social exchange perspective on the ad referral processes. J. Int. Mark. 36, 31–45 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hirsch, J.E.: An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 102(46), 16569–16572 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hoffmann, C.P., Lutz, C., Meckel, M.: Impact factor 2.0: applying social network analysis to scientific impact assessment. In: 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), pp. 1576–1585. IEEE, New York (2014)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Long, J.S., Fox, M.F.: Scientific careers: universalism and particularism. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 21, 45–71 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Long, J.S., Allison, P.D., McGinnis, R.: Entrance into the academic career. Am. Sociol. Rev. 44, 816–830 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Long, J.S., Allison, P.D., McGinnis, R.: Rank advancement in academic careers: sex differences and the effects of productivity. Am. Sociol. Rev. 58, 703–722 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Merton, R.K.: A note on science and democracy. J. Legal. Pol. Soc. 1, 115 (1942)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Newman, M.E., Girvan, M.: Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. Phys. Rev. E 69(2), 026113 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Otte, E., Rousseau, R.: Social network analysis: a powerful strategy, also for the information sciences. J. Inf. Sci. 28(6), 441–453 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Petersen, A.M., Wang, F., Stanley, H.E.: Methods for measuring the citations and productivity of scientists across time and discipline. Phys. Rev. E 81(3), 036114 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Radicchi, F., Fortunato, S., Castellano, C.: Universality of citation distributions: toward an objective measure of scientific impact. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 105(45), 17268–17272 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sinatra, R., Wang, D., Deville, P., Song, C., Barabási, A.L.: Quantifying the evolution of individual scientific impact. Science 354, aaf5239-1–aaf5239-8 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Subbian, K., Aggarval, C., Srivasta, J.: Content-centric flow mining for influence analysis in social streams. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management (2013)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Subbian, K., Aggarval, C., Srivasta, J.: Mining influencers using information flows in social streams. ACM Trans. Knowl. Discov. Data 10, 26:1–26:28 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gabriela Jurca
    • 1
  • Omar Addam
    • 1
  • Jon Rokne
    • 1
  • Reda Alhajj
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of CalgaryCalgaryCanada

Personalised recommendations