Scholarlink

<p>In a previous paper by the authors (Daraio et al. In: Sargsyan Sh, Glänzel W, Abramo G (eds) Proceedings of the 20th international conference on scientometrics and informetrics, 2025, pp 6–15. 10.51408/issi2025_1512025), we have outlined a structured framework for the responsible use of bibliometrics in evaluative contexts in response to the ongoing debate in the scientometrics community, triggered by recent initiatives for research-assessment reform. The framework aimed to clarify the conditions under which bibliometric indicators can meaningfully support evaluation processes, while also focusing on supporting the integration of scientometrics into broader evaluation systems according to the demands of these reforms. The present contribution illustrates several examples of such use and integration practices at three European universities. The first two examples are drawn from KU Leuven and both refer to the meso level of research evaluations. The first example outlines the use of indicators as part of a funding allocation scheme based on output measurement, while the second demonstrates the use of the same or derivative indicators in the context of institutional benchmarking exercises. The example from Sapienza University goes beyond the application of metrics alone, illustrating an ontology-based infrastructure that supports multidimensional research assessment and enables a wide range of potential applications. The last example from the University of Vienna, addresses the micro level, focusing on support of academic recruitment at the university. It illustrates a process in which scientometric indicators are applied and integrated through close interaction with, and validation by all relevant stakeholders, as part of a broader narrative-based evaluation model. Taken together, these examples demonstrate how bibliometric indicators can be responsibly operationalised and integrated across different institutional levels when embedded in transparent, context-sensitive and participatory evaluation frameworks.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Operationalising responsible use of bibliometrics in research evaluation insights obtained from policy application of scientometrics at three European universities

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月18日

查看全文
  • Wolfgang Glänzel,
  • Juan Gorraiz,
  • Cinzia Daraio,
  • Koenraad Debackere

摘要

In a previous paper by the authors (Daraio et al. In: Sargsyan Sh, Glänzel W, Abramo G (eds) Proceedings of the 20th international conference on scientometrics and informetrics, 2025, pp 6–15. 10.51408/issi2025_1512025), we have outlined a structured framework for the responsible use of bibliometrics in evaluative contexts in response to the ongoing debate in the scientometrics community, triggered by recent initiatives for research-assessment reform. The framework aimed to clarify the conditions under which bibliometric indicators can meaningfully support evaluation processes, while also focusing on supporting the integration of scientometrics into broader evaluation systems according to the demands of these reforms. The present contribution illustrates several examples of such use and integration practices at three European universities. The first two examples are drawn from KU Leuven and both refer to the meso level of research evaluations. The first example outlines the use of indicators as part of a funding allocation scheme based on output measurement, while the second demonstrates the use of the same or derivative indicators in the context of institutional benchmarking exercises. The example from Sapienza University goes beyond the application of metrics alone, illustrating an ontology-based infrastructure that supports multidimensional research assessment and enables a wide range of potential applications. The last example from the University of Vienna, addresses the micro level, focusing on support of academic recruitment at the university. It illustrates a process in which scientometric indicators are applied and integrated through close interaction with, and validation by all relevant stakeholders, as part of a broader narrative-based evaluation model. Taken together, these examples demonstrate how bibliometric indicators can be responsibly operationalised and integrated across different institutional levels when embedded in transparent, context-sensitive and participatory evaluation frameworks.