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

  • Erne R
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
23Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

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.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Erne, R. (2007). on the use and abuse of bibliometric performance indicators: a critique of Hix’s ‘global ranking of political science departments.’ European Political Science, 6(3), 306–314. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.eps.2210136

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free