The Profession

European Political Science (2007) 6, 306–314. doi:10.1057/palgrave.eps.2210136

on the use and abuse of bibliometric performance indicators: a critique of Hix's 'global ranking of political science departments'

Roland Ernea

aIndustrial Relations and Human Resources Group, UCD Business School, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland. E-mail: Roland.Erne@ucd.ie

Top

Abstract

Bibliometric measures, as provided by the Social Science Citation Index of the Institute for Scientific Information, certainly represent a useful tool for librarians and researchers. However, although librarian scientists have shown that the use of journal impact factors to evaluate the performance of academics is misleading, some authors continue to promote bibliometric metrics to assess the productivity of academic departments and even the entire European academic community. Taking an ambitious 'global ranking of political science departments' as a reference, this article questions both the reliability and desirability of bibliometric performance indicators. The article concludes that the development of a panopticon-like audit culture in universities will not enhance their quality, but rather undermine the classical idea and purpose of the university.

Keywords:

bibliometric performance indicators, journal impact factor, political science, public policy instruments, research assessment exercise, university restructuring

MORE ARTICLES LIKE THIS

These links to content published by Palgrave Macmillan are automatically generated.

RESEARCH

on the use and abuse of bibliometric performance indicators: a critique of Hix's ?global ranking of political science departments?

European Political Science Original Article

editing the Journal of European Public Policy

European Political Science Original Article

incentives to publish

European Political Science Original Article

Extra navigation

.

ECPR resources

ADVERTISEMENT
Palgrave Connect