1,721,007 research outputs found
Data Files and Documentation - National Coordination of Data Steward Education in Denmark
No full textThis site contains the Data Files and Documentation Files from the National Coordination of Data Steward Education in Denmark Project (2019-2020). The main deliverables from the project are:
The Main Report:
National Coordination of Data Steward Education in Denmark (Main Report)
and
Wildgaard, Lorna
Reframing Data Stewardship educations in Denmark and abroad (Wildgaard)
List of available Data and Documentation Files below:
Wildgaard and Main Report (section 2 Review of Data Steward Education)
1. DS_education_1_review_thematic_analysis.nvp (NVIVO-file)
2. DS_education_2_review_coding_scheme (Excel)
(Created by Wildgaard, Lorna)
Main Report (section 3 LinkedIn analysis)
No data available due to GDPR
Main Report (section 4 Job vacancies analysis)
3. DS_education_3_vacancies_and_method.zip (zip-file)
4. DS_education_4_vacancies_top10_word_frequencies_geographical_location (Excel)
(Created by Vlachos, Evgenios)
The zip-file contains a text file describing the method used in the analysis (Method) and 119 pdf files with Data Steward vacancies.
Main Report (section 5 Questionnaire)
5. DS_education_5_questionnaire_questions
6. DS_education_6_questionnaire_survey_report
(Created by Vlachos, Evgenios & Knudsen, Christian B.)
Main Report (section 6 Interviews)
7. DS_education_7_interviews_summaries_interview_1-4
(Created by Hüser, Falco
Scaling Analysis of Author Level Bibliometric Indicators
Full text linkDespite of the concerns from the bibliometric community, evaluation of the individual through bibliometric indices is already performed as a form of ‘pseudo peer review’ in selection of candidates for tenure, in background checks of potential employees’ publicationand citation impact, and in appraisal of funding applications. As part of developing the ACUMEN portfolio we therefore undertook an extensive review of 114 bibliometric indicators in Wildgaard, Schneider and Larsen (2014) to identify 1) which author level indices are useful to document the effect of publication performance, 2) identify which scientific activities it is possible to measure and with which indices, 3) analyse the applicability of these indices by discussing the strengths and weakness of each one, and 4) identify if there is a need for any additional novel indicators to measures the performance of individuals. The review confirmed that there is no immediate need to develop new bibliometric indicators. There is a wealth of indicators to choose from, some used in practice and some theoretical only. There is however a need to understand the usefulness of existing indicators and which ones represent independent research activities of authors. We have begun our investigation into how indicators complement each other, specifically if there is a redundancy among indicators, i.e. two or more indicators measure the same thing, and which indicators are the “best” choice in regards to four predefined disciplines. The main parameter we judge the usefulness of indicators is on their simplicity, understood as the simplicity of data collection and the simplicity of mathematical computation for each indicator (Wildgaard, Schneider & Larsen 2014). The present study is a further investigation into which effects of publishing and citing these simple indicators attempt to capture
A critical cluster analysis of 44 indicators of author-level performance
No full textThis paper explores the relationship between author-level bibliometric indicators and the researchers the "measure", exemplified across five academic seniorities and four disciplines. Using cluster methodology, the disciplinary and seniority appropriateness of author-level indicators is examined. Publication and citation data for 741 researchers across Astronomy, Environmental Science, Philosophy and Public Health was collected in Web of Science (WoS). Forty-four indicators of individual performance were computed using the data. A two-step cluster analysis using IBM SPSS version 22 was performed, followed by a risk analysis and ordinal logistic regression to explore cluster membership. Indicator scores were contextualized using the individual researcher's curriculum vitae. Four different clusters based on indicator scores ranked researchers as low, middle, high and extremely high performers. The results show that different indicators were appropriate in demarcating ranked performance in different disciplines. In Astronomy the h2 indicator, sum pp top prop in Environmental Science, Q2 in Philosophy and e-index in Public Health. The regression and odds analysis showed individual level indicator scores were primarily dependent on the number of years since the researcher's first publication registered in WoS, number of publications and number of citations. Seniority classification was secondary therefore no seniority appropriate indicators were confidently identified. Cluster methodology proved useful in identifying disciplinary appropriate indicators providing the preliminary data preparation was thorough but needed to be supplemented by other analyses to validate the results. A general disconnection between the performance of the researcher on their curriculum vitae and the performance of the researcher based on bibliometric indicators was observed
National Coordination of Data Steward Education in Denmark:Final report to the National Forum for Research Data Management (DM Forum)
Full text linkThis report provides an analysis of current educations in data stewardship and an evaluation of the needs and expectations to the role of a Data Steward (DS) across the private and public sector. The aim is to inform future data stewardship educations in Denmark. Methods of analysis included a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods such as literature review, text mining, questionnaires, correlation analyses and interviews. All supporting materials produced throughout the report are found and freely available in the project community site
A comparison of 17 author-level bibliometric indicators for researchers in Astronomy, Environmental Science, Philosophy and Public Health in Web of Science and Google Scholar
No full textAuthor-level bibliometric indicators are becoming a standard tool in research assessment. It is important to investigate what these indicators actually measure to assess their appropriateness in scholar ranking and benchmarking average individual levels of performance. 17 author-level indicators were calculated for 512 researchers in Astronomy, Environmental Science, Philosophy and Public Health. Indicator scores and scholar rankings calculated in Web of Science (WoS) and Google Scholar (GS) were analyzed. The indexing policies of WoS and GS were found to have a direct effect on the amount of available bibliometric data, thus indicator scores and rankings in WoS and GS were different, correlations between 0.24 and 0.99. High correlation could be caused by scholars in bottom rank positions with a low number of publications and citations in both databases. The hg indicator produced scholar rankings with the highest level of agreement between WoS and GS and rankings with the least amount of variance. Expected average performance benchmarks were influenced by how the mean indicator value was calculated. Empirical validation of the aggregate mean h-index values compared to previous studies resulted in a very poor fit of predicted average scores. Rankings based on author-level indicators are influenced by (1) the coverage of papers and citations in the database, (2) how the indicators are calculated and, (3) the assessed discipline and seniority. Indicator rankings display the visibility of the scholar in the database not their impact in the academic community compared to their peers. Extreme caution is advised when choosing indicators and benchmarks in scholar rankings
A review of the characteristics of 108 author-level bibliometric indicators
Full text linkAn increasing demand for bibliometric assessment of individuals has led to a growth of new bibliometric indicators as well as new variants or combinations of established ones. The aim of this review is to contribute with objective facts about the usefulness of bibliometric indicators of the effects of publication activity at the individual level. This paper reviews 108 indicators that can potentially be used to measure performance on individual author-level, and examines the complexity of their calculations in relation to what they are supposed to reflect and ease of end-user application. As such we provide a schematic overview of author-level indicators, where the indicators are broadly categorised into indicators of publication count, indicators that qualify output (on the level of the researcher and journal), indicators of the effect of output (effect as citations, citations normalized to field or the researcher’s body of work), indicators that rank the individual’s work and indicators of impact over time. Supported by an extensive appendix we present how the indicators are computed, the complexity of the mathematical calculation and demands to data-collection, their advantages and limitations as well as references to surrounding discussion in the bibliometric community. The Appendix supporting this study is available online as supplementary material
Measure Up!:The extent author-level bibliometric indicators are appropriate measures of individual researcher performance
Full text linkAppendix are available on request from the autho
Guidelines for Good Evaluation Practice with the ACUMEN portfolio
No full textThis document gives guidelines for using the ACUMEN Portfolio to evaluate academic researchers. The ACUMEN Portfolio is a way for Portfolio owners to highlight their achievements and to present themselves in the most positive way. It supplements the traditional CV because it highlights key achievements rather than giving an exhaustive list.This report is written in collaboration with the ACUMEN group of researchers from: Leiden University, CSIC Madrid, eHumanities group KNAW, Wildau Technical University, Bar-Ilan University, The University of Wolverhampton and the Estonian Research Council. I am NOT the sole author
Just pimping the CV? The feasibility of ready-to-use bibliometric indicators to enrich cirriculum vitae
Full text linkThis poster investigates if ready-to-use bibliometric indicators can be used by individual scholars to enrich their curriculum vitae. Selected indicators were tested in four different fields and across 5 different academic seniorities. The results show performance in bibliometric evaluation is highly individual and using indicators as “benchmarks” unwise. Further the simple calculation of cites per publication per years-since-first-publication is a more informative indicator than the ready-to-use ones and cites-per-paper can be used to estimate if it is at all worth the scholar’s time to apply indicators to their CV.Keywords: bibliometrics, ready-to-use indicators, nano-level evaluation, individual metrics, impactCopyright: Copyright is held by the author(s).Acknowledgements: This work is supported by the European Collaboration FP7 Project Academic Careers Understood through Measurements and Norms (ACUMEN). Grant Agreement: 266632.This poster investigates if ready-to-use bibliometric indicators can be used by individual scholars to enrich their curriculum vitae. Selected indicators were tested in four different fields and across 5 different academic seniorities. The results show performance in bibliometric evaluation is highly individual and using indicators as “benchmarks” unwise. Further the simple calculation of cites per publication per years-since-first-publication is a more informative indicator than the ready-to-use ones and can also be used to estimate if it is at all worth the scholar’s time to apply indicators to their CV
What we do not claim becomes invisible
No full textIVA has recently been host to the ACUMEN project. Twenty-one experts in research evaluation, project administrators and European Communion Evaluators have been developing the future of research evaluation, led by Professor Paul Wouters from CWTS, Leiden Universit
- …
