nep-sog New Economics Papers
on Sociology of Economics
Issue of 2011‒01‒30
three papers chosen by
Jonas Holmström
Swedish School of Economics and Business Administration

  1. The Research Output of Business Schools and Business Scholars in Ireland By Tol, Richard S. J.
  2. Average-based versus high-and low-impact indicators for the evaluation of scientific distributions By Pedro Albarrán; Ignacio Ortuño; Javier Ruiz-Castillo
  3. Use and non-use of research evaluation A literature review By van der Most, Frank

  1. By: Tol, Richard S. J.
    Abstract: The research performance of business scholars on the island of Ireland is evaluated based on their number of publication, number of citations, h-index and the same divided by the numbers of years since the first publication. Data were taken from Scopus. There is a large variation in both life-time achievement and annual production. Almost half of the 748 scholars have not published in an academic journal. Men perform better than women. More senior people perform better. There are distinct differences between disciplines, with accountancy performing poorly. On average, scholars in Northern Ireland perform better than scholars in the Republic. However, Trinity College Dublin has the top rank among the eleven business schools; Queen's University Belfast and University College Dublin share the second place; and NUI Galway and the University of Ulster share the fourth spot. Irish business schools specialize in particular research areas so that mergers would lead to schools can support a broader range of cutting-edge education.
    Keywords: Business schools/business scholars/research performance/Ireland
    Date: 2010–12
  2. By: Pedro Albarrán; Ignacio Ortuño; Javier Ruiz-Castillo
    Abstract: Albarran et al. (2011a) introduced a novel methodology for the evaluation of citation distributions consisting of a pair of high- and a low-impact measures defined over the set of articles with citations below or above a critical citation level CCL. Albarran et al. (2011b) presented the first empirical applications to a situation in which the world citation distribution in 22 scientific fields is partitioned into three geographical areas: the U.S., the European Union, and the rest of the world. In this paper, we compare our results with those obtained with average-based indicators. For reasonable CCLs, such as the 80th percentile of the world citation distribution in each field, the cardinal differences between the results obtained with our high-impact index and the mean citation rate are of a large order of magnitude. When, in addition, the percentage in the top 5% of most cited articles or the percentage of uncited articles are used, there are still important quantitative differences with respect to the high- and low-impact indicators advocated in our approach when the CCL is fixed at the 80th or the 95th percentile.
    Date: 2010–12
  3. By: van der Most, Frank (CIRCLE, Lund University)
    Abstract: This paper reviews the literature in research evaluation and in social program evaluation on the topic of use and effects of research evaluation. The past two or three decades have seen the emergence of several new forms of research evaluation next to the existing peer review practices on papers and project proposals. The UK Research Assessment Exercises are among the most studied and discussed ones. Many other types of evaluations have received some attention but when it comes to their use and effects, interest also quickly faded. It seems time to re-address the issue and see what can be learned from the existing literature for a study of use and effects. The paper also draws on literature from social program evaluation for additional insights since in this field the concern for use and effects is further developed. The most important insight gained is that use and effects of evaluations extend beyond those implied by policy-cycle perspectives and peer review. Furthermore, concepts and conceptual frames from the field of science and technology studies can be productive in the study of a wide range of use and effects, including the pressing issue of non-use.
    Keywords: Research evaluation; social program evaluation
    JEL: O30
    Date: 2011–01–20

This nep-sog issue is ©2011 by Jonas Holmström. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.