Published in Research Policy.
Best Paper Award in the canadian viagra india 2011 Atlanta Science and Innovation Conference (William Page Award)
Science Maps (Click here to explore interactive maps)
In the context of increasingly competitive assessments frameworks, academic institutions are crafting strategies to improve their performance, in particular pushing researchers towards publish in high rank journals. This raises questions over possible unintended effects of a shift in publication strategy towards higher ranked journals.
This study provides new quantitative evidence on canada viagra generic how journal rankings can disadvantage interdisciplinary research during research evaluations. It compares the degree of interdisciplinarity and the research performance of innovation studies units with business and management schools in the UK. Using various mappings and levitra wholesale los angeles metrics, this study shows that: (i) innovation studies units are consistently more interdisciplinary than business and management schools; (ii) the top journals in the Association of Business Schools’ rankings span a less diverse set of visit our site disciplines than lower ranked journals; (iii) this pattern results in a more favourable performance assessment of the business and management schools, which are more disciplinary-focused. Lastly, it demonstrates how a citation-based analysis challenges the ranking-based assessment.
In summary, the investigation illustrates how ostensibly ‘excellence-based’ journal rankings have a systematic bias in favour of mono-disciplinary research. The paper concludes with a discussion of implications of these phenomena and how resulting bias is likely to affect negatively the evaluation and associated financial resourcing of interdisciplinary organisations and encourage researchers to be more compliant with disciplinary authority.
Supplementary materials (maps in PowerPoint format):
- Diversity, Coherence and Intermediation of each unit.
- Disciplinary diversity of my921.ca ABS rankings
- Performance metrics of Units
This chapter reviews and generalises the approach in the previous paper. Available here.
Ying Ding, Ronald Rousseau, Wolfram Dietmar (Editors)
Measuring scholarly Impact: Methods and Practice, Springer, forthcoming.
In this chapter, I present a framework based on the concepts of diversity and coherence for the follow link analysis of knowledge integration and diffusion. Visualisations that help understand insights gained are also introduced. The key novelty offered by this framework compared to previous approaches is the inclusion of cognitive distance (or proximity) between the categories that characterise the body of knowledge under study. I briefly discuss the different methods to map the cognitive dimension.