Toward an excellence-based research funding system: Evidence from Poland

Journal of Informetrics

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 282-298

  Kulczycki, Emanuel ^a   Korzeń, Marcin ^b   Korytkowski, Przemysław ^b  

^a ADAM MICKIEWICZ UNIVERSITY   (Poland)

^b WEST POMERANIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Poland)

Author keywords

Bibliometrics; Excellence in research; Metrics; Poland; Research evaluation

Indexed keywords

DECISION TREES;

BIBLIOMETRICS; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; METRICS; MULTIVARIATE LOGISTIC REGRESSIONS; POLAND; RESEARCH EVALUATION; RESEARCH FUNDING; RESEARCH PERFORMANCE;

MULTIVARIANT ANALYSIS;

EID: 85010366593     PISSN: 17511577     EISSN: 18755879     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2017.01.001     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Aagaard, K., Bloch, C., Schneider, J.W., Impacts of performance-based research funding systems: the case of the Norwegian Publication Indicator. Research Evaluation 24:2 (2015), 106–117, 10.1093/reseval/rvv003.
2. Aagaard, K., How incentives trickle down: Local use of a national bibliometric indicator system. Research Evaluation 42:5 (2015), 725–737, 10.1093/scipol/scu087.
3. Abramo, G., D'Angelo, C.A., Evaluating university research: Same performance indicator, different rankings. Journal of Informetrics 9:3 (2015), 514–525, 10.1016/j.joi.2015.04.002.
4. Ancaiani, A., Anfossi, A.F., Barbara, A., Benedetto, S., Blasi, B., Carletti, V., et al. Evaluating scientific research in Italy: The 2004–10 research evaluation exercise. Research Evaluation, 2015, 1–14, 10.1093/reseval/rvv008.
5. Antonowicz, D., Brzeziński, J.M., Doświadczenia parametryzacji jednostek naukowych z obszaru nauk humanistycznych i społecznych 2013–z myślą o parametryzacji 2017. Nauka 4 (2013), 51–85.
6. Arthur, M., Excellence in research. Tayeb, O., Zahed, A., Ritzen, J., (eds.) Becoming a world-Class university, 2015, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 77–90, 10.1007/978-3-319-26380-9_5.
7. Bloch, C., Schneider, J.W., Performance-based funding models and researcher behavior: An analysis of the influence of the Norwegian Publication Indicator at the individual level. Research Evaluation, 2016, 047–112, 10.1093/reseval/rvv047.
8. Bonzi, S., Snyder, H.W., Motivations for citation: A comparison of self citation and citation to others. Scientometrics 21:2 (1991), 245–254, 10.1007/bf02017571.
9. Campbell, D.T., Assessing the impact of planned social change. Evaluation and Program Planning 2 (1979), 67–90.
10. Chowdhury, G., Koya, K., Philipson, P., Measuring the impact of research: Lessons from the UK's research excellence framework. PLoS One 2014 (2016), 1–15, 10.1371/journal.pone.0156978.
11. Ferrara, A., Bonaccorsi, A., How robust is journal rating in Humanities and Social Sciences? Evidence from a large-scale, multi-method exercise. Research Evaluation, 2016, rvv048-13, 10.1093/reseval/rvv048.
12. Good, B., Vermeulen, N., Tiefenthaler, B., Arnold, E., Counting quality? The Czech performance-based research funding system. Research Evaluation 24:2 (2015), 91–105, 10.1093/reseval/rvu035.
13. Haddow, G., Genoni, P., Citation analysis and peer ranking of Australian social science journals. Scientometrics 85:2 (2010), 471–487, 10.1007/s11192-010-0198-4.
14. Harrell, F.E. Jr., rms: Regression modeling strategies. 2014 http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=rms.
15. Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L., de Rijcke, S., Rafols, I., Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature 520:7548 (2015), 429–431, 10.1038/520429a.
16. Hicks, D., Evolving regimes of multi-university research evaluation. Higher Education 57:4 (2009), 393–404, 10.1007/s10734-008-9154-0.
17. Hicks, D., Performance-based university research funding systems. Research Policy 41:2 (2012), 251–261, 10.1016/j.respol.2011.09.007.
18. Hosmer, D.W.J., Lemeshow, J., Sturdivant, R.X., Applied logistic regression. 2013, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, USA, 10.1002/9781118548387.
19. Jonkers, K., & Zacharewicz, T. (2016). Research Performance based funding systems: A comparative assessment. 10.2791/659483.
20. Klincewicz, K. & Szkuta, K. (2016). RIO Country Report 2015: Poland; EUR 27872 EN; 10.2791/984739.
21. Koczkodaj, W.W., Kułakowski, K., Ligęza, A., On the quality evaluation of scientific entities in Poland supported by consistency-driven pairwise comparisons method. Scientometrics 99:3 (2014), 911–926, 10.1007/s11192-014-1258-y.
22. Kuhn, M., Caret: Classification and regression training. Astrophysics Source Code Library, 1, 2015, 05003.
23. Kulczycki, E., Drabek, A., Rozkosz, E.A., Publikacje a zgłoszenia ewaluacyjne, czyli zniekształcony obraz nauki w Polsce. Nauka, 2015, 35–58.
24. Kulczycki, E., Assessing Publications through a Bibliometric Indicator: The case of comprehensive evaluation of scientific units in Poland. Research Evaluation, 2017, 1–12, 10.1093/reseval/rvw023.
25. MNiSW (Ministry of Science and Higher Education in Poland) (2015). Higher Education and Science Development Programme for 2015–2030 (orig. Program Rozwoju Szkolnictwa Wyższego i Nauki na lata 2015–2013), Semptember 2015.
26. OECD (2007). Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Revised field of science and technology (FOS) classification in the Frascati manual. Paris; 2007 Feb. Report No.: DSTI/EAS/STP/NESTI(2006)19/FINAL. Available from: https://www.oecd.org/science/inno/38235147.pdf.
27. Rijcke, S., de Wouters, P.F., Rushforth, A.D., Franssen, T.P., Hammarfelt, B., Evaluation practices and effects of indicator use: A literature review. Research Evaluation 25:2 (2016), 161–169, 10.1093/reseval/rvv038.
28. Saarela, M., Kärkkäinen, T., Lahtonen, T., Rossi, T., Expert-based versus citation-based ranking of scholarly and scientific publication channels. Journal of Informetrics 10:3 (2016), 693–718, 10.1016/j.joi.2016.03.004.
29. Sadowski, I., Mach, B.W., Parametryzacja i kategoryzacja jednostek naukowych w roku 2013 jako praktyka ewaluacyjna i proces instytucjonalny. Nauka 2 (2014), 67–103.
30. Schneider, J.W., Aagaard, K., Bloch, C.W., What happens when funding is linked to (differentiated) publication counts? New insights from an evaluation of the Norwegian Publication Indicator. Noyons, E., (eds.) Proceedings of the science and technology indicators conference 2014 Leiden Context Counts: Pathways to Master Big and Little Data, 2014, Universiteit Leiden, Leiden, 543–550.
31. Sivertsen, G., Data integration in Scandinavia. Scientometrics, 2015, 1–7, 10.1007/s11192-015-1817-x.
32. Skoczeń, B., Antonowicz, D., Brzeziński, P., Jackowski, S., Pilc, A., Zabel, M., Kategoryzacja jednostek naukowych po kampanii odwołań. 2014, Forum Akademickie, 7–8 https://forumakademickie.pl/fa/2014/07-08/kategoryzacja-jednostek-naukowych-po-kampanii-odwolan/.
33. Sunkel, C., Excellence and the new social contract for science: In search for scientific excellence in a changing environment. EMBO Reports 16:5 (2015), 553–556, 10.15252/embr.201540328.
34. Teodorescu, D., Andrei, T., An examination of citation circles for social sciences journals in Eastern European countries. Scientometrics 99:2 (2013), 209–231, 10.1007/s11192-013-1210-6.
35. Therneau, T., Atkinson, B., & Ripley, B. (2015). rpart: Recursive partitioning and regression trees.
36. Vanclay, J.K., An evaluation of the Australian Research Council's journal ranking. Journal of Informetrics 5:2 (2011), 265–274, 10.1016/j.joi.2010.12.001.
37. van Leeuwen, T.N., Visser, M.S., Moed, H.F., Nederhof, T.J., Van Raan, A.F.J., The Holy Grail of science policy: Exploring and combining bibliometric tools in search of scientific excellence. Scientometrics 57:2 (2003), 257–280, 10.1023/A: 1024141819302.
38. Venables, W.N., Ripley, B.D., Modern applied statistics with S. 2002, Springer.
39. Wagner, C.S., Six case studies of international collaboration in science. Scientometrics 62:1 (2005), 3–26, 10.1007/s11192-005-0001-0.