Professional competencies and jurisdictional claims in evaluative bibliometrics: The educational mandate of academic librarians

Petersohn, Sabrina

doi:10.3233/efi-150972

Cited by 13 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, Petersohn and Heinze [ 39 ] examined the history of the Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS) at the University of Leiden (Netherlands), the leading expert organization in Europe. In addition, Petersohn [ 40 ] investigated jurisdictional claims by academic librarians in the United Kingdom and Germany. These established professionals increasingly provide bibliometric services to individual researchers and university management.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does bibliometric research confer legitimacy to research assessment practice? A sociological study of reputational control, 1972-2016

Jappe¹,

Pithan²,

Heinze³

2018

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of bibliometric measures in the evaluation of research has increased considerably based on expertise from the growing research field of evaluative citation analysis (ECA). However, mounting criticism of such metrics suggests that the professionalization of bibliometric expertise remains contested. This paper investigates why impact metrics, such as the journal impact factor and the h-index, proliferate even though their legitimacy as a means of professional research assessment is questioned. Our analysis is informed by two relevant sociological theories: Andrew Abbott’s theory of professions and Richard Whitley’s theory of scientific work. These complementary concepts are connected in order to demonstrate that ECA has failed so far to provide scientific authority for professional research assessment. This argument is based on an empirical investigation of the extent of reputational control in the relevant research area. Using three measures of reputational control that are computed from longitudinal inter-organizational networks in ECA (1972–2016), we show that peripheral and isolated actors contribute the same number of novel bibliometric indicators as central actors. In addition, the share of newcomers to the academic sector has remained high. These findings demonstrate that recent methodological debates in ECA have not been accompanied by the formation of an intellectual field in the sociological sense of a reputational organization. Therefore, we conclude that a growing gap exists between an academic sector with little capacity for collective action and increasing demand for routine performance assessment by research organizations and funding agencies. This gap has been filled by database providers. By selecting and distributing research metrics, these commercial providers have gained a powerful role in defining de-facto standards of research excellence without being challenged by expert authority.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does bibliometric research confer legitimacy to research assessment practice? A sociological study of reputational control, 1972-2016

Jappe¹,

Pithan²,

Heinze³

2018

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Increasing staff bibliometric literacy and different forms of training also were commonly related as core which may be an effect of the large proportion of library-based respondents. The data suggests that a considerable proportion (27/99) of Petersohn (2016), whilst providing a lot more detail. Respondents mainly saw bibliometrics as about empowering academics through information and training.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…These do not suggest a fundamental difference of view about what bibliometrics is. An Abbottonian analysis as developed by Petersohn (2016) would expect there to be a greater difference, reflecting competing professions' attempts to define the practice in ways consistent with their own knowledge base. The lack of such a pattern may be due to the small dataset.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are also some useful practitioner descriptions of typical activities (Delasalle, 2011). The most substantial study in this area was produced by Petersohn (2016) who considers the cognitive and social claims made for jurisdiction over bibliometrics by librarians in the UK and Germany. She argues that if ultimately the purpose of bibliometrics is measuring the quality of science, librarians tend to interpret this from within their existing knowledge base, as an information problem.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Competencies for bibliometrics

Cox

Gadd

Petersohn

et al. 2017

Journal of Librarianship and Information Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Universities are increasingly offering support services for bibliometrics, often based in the library. This paper describes work done to produce a competency model for those supporting bibliometrics. The results of a questionnaire in which current practitioners rated bibliometric tasks as entry level, core or specialist are reported. Entry level competencies identified were explaining bibliometric concepts, doing basic calculations and some professional skills. Activities identified by participants as core are outlined. Reflecting on items that were considered in scope but specialist there was less stress on evaluating scholars, work at a strategic level, working with data outside proprietary bibliometric tools and consultancy-type services as opposed to training for disintermediated use. A competency model is presented as an appendix.

show abstract

“…Data from a survey of 114 ACRL libraries in the US found that 80% had a 'faculty activity reporting (FAR)' tool. 37 We are also seeing growth in the number of research impact or analytics-type posts in universities (mostly in libraries) 38 and more recently (as universities are struggling to recruit) I have observed an increase in the seniority of these posts. Again, the ACRL library survey found that 70% had an individual or group assigned to research impact.…”

Section: More Costmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influencing the changing world of research evaluation

Gadd

2019

Insights the UKSG Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article provides an overview of the current research evaluation landscape, the problems inherent within it and some of the ways a newly formed INORMS (International Network of Research Management Societies) working group on research evaluation is seeking to address them. These include developing a way of rating university ranking bodies and developing a set of briefing materials on responsible research evaluation for senior managers.

show abstract

Professional competencies and jurisdictional claims in evaluative bibliometrics: The educational mandate of academic librarians

Cited by 13 publications

References 0 publications

Does bibliometric research confer legitimacy to research assessment practice? A sociological study of reputational control, 1972-2016

Does bibliometric research confer legitimacy to research assessment practice? A sociological study of reputational control, 1972-2016

Competencies for bibliometrics

Influencing the changing world of research evaluation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About