How productivity and impact differ across computer science subareas: How to understand evaluation criteria for CS researchers

Communications of the ACM

Volumn 56, Issue 8, 2013, Pages 67-73

  Wainer, Jacques ^a   Eckmann, Michael ^b   Goldenstein, Siome ^a   Rocha, Anderson ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMPINAS   (Brazil)

^b SKIDMORE COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EVALUATION CRITERIA; SUB-AREAS;

COMPUTER APPLICATIONS;

COMPUTER SCIENCE;

EID: 84881490981     PISSN: 00010782     EISSN: 15577317     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1145/2492007.2492026     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Barbosa, S.D.J. and de Souza, C.S. Are HCI researchers an endangered species in Brazil? Interactions 18, 3 (May/June 2011), 69-71.
2. Biryukov, M. and Dong, C. Analysis of computer science communities based on DBLP. In Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries, Volume 6273 of LNCS. Springer, Berlin 2010, 228-235.
3. Chen, C. Classification of scientific networks using aggregated journal-journal citation relations in the journal citation reports. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 59, 14 (Dec. 2008), 2296-2304.
4. Elmacioglu, E. and Lee, D. On six degrees of separation in DBLP-DB and more. ACM SIGMOD Record 34, 2 (June 2005), 33-40.
5. Franceschet, M. Collaboration in computer science: A network science approach. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 62, 10 (Oct. 2011), 1992-2012.
6. Grudin, J. A List of Publication Culture Discussions and Resources, 2012; http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/ um/people/jgrudin/CACM views.pdf
7. Laender, A., de Lucena, C., Maldonado, J., de Souza e Silva, E., and Zivianim, N. Assessing the research and education quality of the top Brazilian computer science graduate programs. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin 40, 2 (June 2008), 135-145.
8. Lee, F., Grijalva, T., and Nowell, C. Ranking economics departments in a contested discipline: A bibliometric approach to quality equality between theoretically distinct subdisciplines. American Journal of Economics and Sociology 69, 5 (Nov. 2010), 1345-1375.
9. Meyer, B., Choppy, C., Staunstrup, J., and van Leeuwen, J. Research evaluation for computer science. Commun. ACM 52, 4 (Apr. 2009), 31-34.
10. Patterson, D., Snyder, L., and Ullman, J. Evaluating Computer Scientists and Engineers for Promotion and Tenure. Technical Report. Computing Research Association, Washington, D.C., Aug. 1999; http://www. cra.org/resources/bp- memos/evaluating-computer- scientists-and-engineers-for-promotion-and-tenure/
11. Reitz, F. and Hoffmann, O. An analysis of the evolving coverage of computer science subfields in the DBLP digital library. Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries. Volume 6273 of LNCS. Springer, Berlin, 2010, 216-227.
12. Rosen-Zvi, M., Griffiths, T., Steyvers, M., and Smyth, P. The author-topic model for authors and documents. In Proceedings of the 20th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (Banff, Canada, July 7-11). AUA I Press, Arlington, VA, 2004, 487-494.
13. Wagner, C., Roessner, J., Bobb, K., Klein, J., Boyack, K., Keyton, J., Rafols, I., and Börner, K. Approaches to understanding and measuring interdisciplinary scientific research: A review of the literature. Journal of Informetrics 5, 1 (Jan. 2011), 14-26.
14. Wainer, J., Billa, C., and Goldenstein, S. Invisible work in standard bibliometric evaluation of computer science. Commun. ACM 54, 5 (May 2011), 141-146.
15. Wainer, J., Eckmann, M., Goldenstein, S., and Rocha, A. Differences in Productivity and Impact Across the Different Computer Science Subareas. Technical Report IC-12-08. Institute of Computing, University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil, Mar. 2012; http://www. ic.unicamp.br/~reltech/2012/12-08.pdf