Skip to main content
Log in

Research performance indicators for university departments: A study of an agricultural university

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The present bibliometric study extends previous work by focusing on the research performance of departments in the natural and life sciences, the social and behavioral sciences, and the humanities. The present study covers all 70 departments from one agricultural university, and several veterinary departments of a second university. The impact analysis was extended by including other types of documents than journal articles. For about a third of the departments, publications not covered in citation indexes accounted for at least 30% of the citations to their total oeuvre. To deal with different citation and publication habits in the various fields, both short-term and medium-term impact assessments were made. The commonly used three year window is not universally applicable, as our results show. The inclusion of self-citations forms an important source of error in the ratio of actual/expected impact. To cope with this, the trend and level of self-citations was compared at university level with that in a matched sample of publications. Moreover, at a departmental level, self-citation rates were used to detect departments with divergent levels of self-citation. The expected impact of journals accounted for only 18% of the variance in actual impact. Comparison of bibliometric indicators with two peer evaluations showed that the bibliometric impact analyses provided important additional information.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Davis, P., G. F. Papanek, Faculty ratings of major economic departments by citations,American Economic Review, 74 (1984) 225–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harnad, S., (Ed.),Peer Commentary on Peer Review, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, B. R., J. Irvine, Assessing basic research: some partial indicators of scientific progress in radio astronomy,Research Policy, 12 (1983) 61–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meijer, R. F., Nederhof, A. J., van Raan, A. F. J.,Aspects of Knowledge Transfer in Agriculture in in the Netherlands, Research report to the National Council for Agricultural Research (NRLO). Leiden: CWTS, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H. F., Burger, W. J. M., Frankfort, J. G., Van Raan, A. F. J., The use of bibliometric data for the measurement of university research performance,Research Policy, 14 (1985a) 131–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H. F., Burger, W. J. M., Frankfort, J. G., Van Raan, A. F. J., A comparative study of bibliometric past performance analysis and peer judgement,Scientometrics, 8 (1985b) 149–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H. F.,The Use of Bibliometric Indicators for the Assessment of Research Performance in the Natural and Life Sciences, Leiden, DSWO Press, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nederhof, A. J., The validity and reliability of evaluation of scholarly performance, In:A. F. J. van Raan,op. cit. pp. 193–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nederhof, A. J., Books and chapters are not to be neglected in measuring research productivity,American Psychologist, 44 (1989) 734–735.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nederhof, A. J., Noyons, E. C. M., International comparison of departments' research performance in the humanities,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43 (1992) 249–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nederhof, A. J., Noyons, E. C. M., Assessment of the international standing of university departments' research: A comparison of bibliometric methods,Scientometrics, 24 (1992) 393–404.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nederhof, A. J., A. F. J. Van Raan, A validation study of bibliometric indicators: the comparative performance of cum laude doctorates in chemistry,Scientometrics, 17 (1989) 427–435.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nederhof, A. J., A. F. J. Van Raan, A bibliometric analysis of six economics research groups: A comparison with peer review,Research Policy, (in press).

  • Nederhof, A. J., R. A. Zwaan, R. E. de Bruin, P. J. Dekker, Assessing the usefulness of bibliometric indicators in the humanities and the social sciences: A comparative study,Scientometrics, 15 (1989) 423–437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Price, D. J. deS,Little Science, Big Science, Columbia University Press, New York, 1963.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seglen, P. O., From bad to worse: evaluation by journal impact,Trends in Biochemical Science, 14 (1989) 326–327.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spangenberg, J. F. A., W. Buijink, W. Alfenaar, Some incentives and constraints of scientific performance in departments of economics,Scientometrics, 18 (1990) 241–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Raan, A. F. J. (Ed.),Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology, Amsterdam, North-Holland/Elsevier Science Publishers, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nederhof, A.J., Meijer, R.F., Moed, H.F. et al. Research performance indicators for university departments: A study of an agricultural university. Scientometrics 27, 157–178 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016548

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016548

Keywords

Navigation