What we have learned from San Francisco declaration on research assessment and Leiden Manifesto?

Journal of Educational Media and Library Sciences

Volumn 54, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 111-129

  Chen, Carey Ming Li ^a,b   Lin, Wen Yau Cathy ^c  

^a NATIONAL APPLIED RESEARCH LABORATORIES   (Taiwan)

^b NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^c TAMKANG UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Informetrics; Leiden Manifesto; Research evaluation indicator; San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA)

Indexed keywords

EID: 85044233607     PISSN: 1013090X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.6120/JoEMLS.2017.541/0015     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Alberts, B. (2013). Impact factor distortions. Science, 340(6134), 787. doi:10.1126/ science.1240319
2. David, D., & Frangopol, P. (2015). The lost paradise, the original sin, and the Dodo bird: A scientometrics Sapere Aude manifesto as a reply to the Leiden manifesto on scientometrics. Scientometrics, 105(3), 2255-2257. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1634-2
3. de Rijcke, S. (2014). The Leiden Manifesto in the making proposal of a set of principles on the use of assessment metrics in the S&T indicators conference. Retrieved from https:// citationculture.wordpress.com/2014/09/15/the-leiden-manifesto-in-the-making-proposalof-a-set-of-principles-on-the-use-of-assessment-metrics-in-the-st-indicators-conference/
4. DORA. (2012). San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA). Retrieved from http://www.ascb.org/dora/
5. Halevi, G. (2014). Reporting back: STI 2014 Leiden, The Netherlands. Research Trends, 39. Retrieved from http://www.researchtrends.com/issue-39-december-2014/reporting-backsti-2014-leiden-the-netherlands/
6. Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L., de Rijcke, S., & Rafols, I. (2015). Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature, 520(7548), 429-431. doi:10.1038/520429a
7. Jacobs, H. (2013). Dear DORA. EMBO Reports, 14(11), 947-947
8. Leiden Manifesto for Research Metrics. (2015). Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Retrieved from http://www.leidenmanifesto.org
9. Loughborough University. (2016). Using bibliometrics responsibly. Retrieved from http://www. lboro.ac.uk/research/scholcomms/assessment/respmetrics/
10. OECD. (2016). OECD science, technology and innovation outlook 2016. Paris, France: Author. doi:10.1787/sti_in_outlook-2016-en
11. Pulverer, B. (2015). Dora the brave. The EMBO Journal, 34(12), 1601-1602. doi:10.15252/ embj.201570010
12. Reich, E. S. (2013). Science publishing: The golden club. Nature, 502(7471), 291-293. doi:10.1038/502291a
13. Schmid, S. L. (2013). Beyond CVs and impact factors: An employer's manifesto. doi:10.1126/ science.caredit.a1300186
14. Verma, I. M. (2015). Impact, not impact factor. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(26), 7875-7876. doi:10.1073/pnas.1509912112
15. Waltman, L., & Van Eck, N. J. (2016). The need for contextualized scientometric analysis: An opinion paper. In I. Ràfols, J. Molas-Gallart, E. Castro-Martínez, & R. Woolley (Eds.), Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators (pp. 541-549). Valencia, Spain: Editorial Universitat Politècnica de València. doi:10.4995/ STI2016.2016.4543
16. Wilsdon, J., Allen, L., Belfiore, E., Campbell, P., Curry, S., Hill, S., . Johnson, B. (2015). The metric tide: Report of the independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment and management. doi:10.13140/RG.2.1.4929.1363
17. Wouters, P., Glänzel, W., Gläser, J., & Rafols, I. (2013). The dilemmas of performance indicators of individual researchers: A urgent debate in bibliometrics. ISSI Newsletter, 9(3), 48-53