What are we measuring? Refocusing on some fundamentals in the age of desktop bibliometrics. Issue 8 (12th March 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Rowlands, Ian
• Is Part Of: FEMS microbiology letters. Volume 365:Issue 8(2018:Apr.)
• Publication Date: 2018-03-12
• Subjects: bibliometrics -- research evaluation -- construct validity; Microbiology -- Periodicals; 579
• DOI: 10.1093/femsle/fny059
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0378-1097

Abstract

Abstract: The central challenge in bibliometrics is finding the best ways to represent complex constructs like 'quality, ' 'impact' or 'excellence' using quantitative methods. The marketplace for bibliometric data and services has evolved rapidly and users now face quite unprecedented choice when it comes to the range of data now available: from traditional citation-based indicators to reader ratings and Wikipedia mentions. Choice and ease of access have democratised bibliometrics and this is a tool now available to everyone. The era of 'desktop bibliometrics' should be welcomed: it promises greater transparency and the opportunity for experimentation in a field that has frankly become a little jaded. The downside is that we are in danger of chasing numbers for numbers' sake, with little understanding of what they mean. There is a looming crisis in construct validity, fuelled by supply side choice and user-side impatience, and this has significant implications for all stakeholders in the research evaluation space. Abstract : Massive choice in new bibliometric indicators is creating new opportunities for evaluating research but it is also leading to a crisis of construct validity.