What is the appropriate length of the publication period over which to assess research performance?

Scientometrics

Volumn 93, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 1005-1017

  Abramo, Giovanni ^a,b   D'Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea ^b   Cicero, Tindaro ^b  

^a CNR   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ROME TOR VERGATA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Bibliometrics; Publication period; Research evaluation; Research productivity; Sensitivity analysis; Universities

Indexed keywords

EID: 84869150992     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0714-9     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Abramo, G., Cicero, T., & D'Angelo, C. A. (2011). Assessing the varying level of impact measurement accuracy as a function of the citation window length. Journal of Informetrics, 5(4), 659-667.
2. Abramo, G., Cicero, T., & D'Angelo, C. A. (2012). A sensitivity analysis of researchers' productivity rankings to citation window length. Journal of Informetrics, 6(2), 192-201.
3. Abramo, G., & D'Angelo, C. A. (2007). Measuring science: irresistible temptations, easy shortcuts and dangerous consequences. Current Science, 93(6), 762-766.
4. Abramo, G., & D'Angelo, C. A. (2011). National-scale research performance assessment at the individual level. Scientometrics, 86(2), 347-364.
5. Amat, C. B. (2008). Editorial and publication delay of papers submitted to 14 selected food research journals. Influence of Online Posting. Scientometrics, 74(3), 379-389.
6. Bhattacharya, A., Newhouse, H. (2010). Allocative efficiency and an incentive scheme for research. Discussion Papers 10/02, Department of Economics, University of York.
7. Burrell, Q. L. (2002). Modeling citation age data: simple graphical methods from reliability theory. Scientometrics, 55, 273-285.
8. Butler, L. (2003). Modifying publication practices in response to funding formulas. Research Evaluation, 17(1), 39-46.
9. D'Angelo, C. A., Giuffrida, C., & Abramo, G. (2011). A heuristic approach to author name disambiguation in large-scale bibliometric databases. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(2), 257-269.
10. ERA (2010). The excellence in research for Australia (ERA) initiative. http://www.arc.gov.au/era/. Accessed 16 December 2011.
11. Geuna, A., & Martin, B. R. (2003). University research evaluation and funding: an international comparison. Minerva, 41(4), 277-304.
12. Glänzel, W. (2004). Towards a model for diachronous and synchronous citation analyses. Scientometrics, 60(3), 511-522.
13. Lundberg, J. (2007). Lifting the crown-citation z-score. Journal of Informetrics, 1(2), 145-154.
14. Luwel, M., & Moed, H. F. (1998). Publication delays in the science field and their relationship to the ageing of scientific literature. Scientometrics, 41(1-2), 29-40.
15. Moed, H. F. (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation. Springer, ISBN: 978-1-4020-3713-9.
16. OECD (2010). Performance-based funding for public research in tertiary education institutions. Workshop proceedings OECD 2010, 187, ISBN: 978-92-64-09461-1.
17. Rehn, C., Kronman, U., Wadsko, D. (2007). Bibliometric indicators definitions and usage at Karolinska Institutet. Karolinska Institutet University Library. http://kib.ki.se/sites/kib.ki.se/files/Bibliometric_indicators_definitions_1.0.pdf. Accessed 8 March 2012.
18. Trivedi, P. K. (1993). An analysis of publication lags in econometrics. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 8(1), 93-100.