About this Research Topic
Most scientometric journals focus on publishing articles dealing with the introduction of new indicators, the exploration of new methodological techniques, the analysis of new instruments and data sources or the collection and comparison of the results traced from different tools. However, articles of a practical nature showing best practices in different institutions, the responsible and sound use of the different metrics, or the offer of new and innovative services for scientists, and administrations and science policymakers, are usually rejected despite being of high interest.
This generates the tendency to favour those scientists who work in their ivory towers and publish an endless number of works without practical use, to the detriment of those ones working from a more practical way, trying to apply correctly indicators and methods, revealing and learning from their deficiencies, and refining and adapting them to suit the needs of the different target groups. The predominance of theoretical publications makes scientometrics a “dead” discipline, in very clear contradiction with its genuine definition according to Pritchard, i.e. the application of mathematics and statistical methods to books and other media of communication.
The increasingly frequent appearance of manifestos and declarations (e.g. San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), Leiden Manifesto, or more recently, the Honk Kong Principles) underlines the need to seek best practices and curb misuse. However, these initiatives are generally reduced to prevent misuse or give recommendations, instead of providing practical guidance.
The purpose of this Research Topic is to gather critical contributions from researchers who are able to share their experiences, initiatives, projects, policies or other insights concerning best practices in bibliometrics.
This Article Collection aims to compile original applied bibliometric knowledge at the micro-, meso- and macro-level, as well as the description of responsible and innovative bibliometric services. It will also help to refrain from bad practices that are affecting the development of this discipline and contributing to its discredit.
Original research papers and review articles are the preferred document types, but other types are also welcome if suitable (see here ).
Suggested Topics:
- Multidimensional approaches for research assessment
- Responsible use of applied bibliometrics
- New trends in Open Science
- Traditional and new metrics
- Detrimental effects of research assessment practices
- Rethinking and adapting metrics in the praxis
- Limits of bibliometrics and abusive uses
- Best practices of informed peer review
- The use of Big Data in bibliometric services
- Comparative studies of bibliometric uses in scientific policies.
This generates the tendency to favour those scientists who work in their ivory towers and publish an endless number of works without practical use, to the detriment of those ones working from a more practical way, trying to apply correctly indicators and methods, revealing and learning from their deficiencies, and refining and adapting them to suit the needs of the different target groups. The predominance of theoretical publications makes scientometrics a “dead” discipline, in very clear contradiction with its genuine definition according to Pritchard, i.e. the application of mathematics and statistical methods to books and other media of communication.
The increasingly frequent appearance of manifestos and declarations (e.g. San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), Leiden Manifesto, or more recently, the Honk Kong Principles) underlines the need to seek best practices and curb misuse. However, these initiatives are generally reduced to prevent misuse or give recommendations, instead of providing practical guidance.
The purpose of this Research Topic is to gather critical contributions from researchers who are able to share their experiences, initiatives, projects, policies or other insights concerning best practices in bibliometrics.
This Article Collection aims to compile original applied bibliometric knowledge at the micro-, meso- and macro-level, as well as the description of responsible and innovative bibliometric services. It will also help to refrain from bad practices that are affecting the development of this discipline and contributing to its discredit.
Original research papers and review articles are the preferred document types, but other types are also welcome if suitable (see here ).
Suggested Topics:
- Multidimensional approaches for research assessment
- Responsible use of applied bibliometrics
- New trends in Open Science
- Traditional and new metrics
- Detrimental effects of research assessment practices
- Rethinking and adapting metrics in the praxis
- Limits of bibliometrics and abusive uses
- Best practices of informed peer review
- The use of Big Data in bibliometric services
- Comparative studies of bibliometric uses in scientific policies.
Keywords: bibliometrics, scientometrics, research assessment, best practices, open science, scientific policy
Important Note: All contributions to this Research Topic must be within the scope of the section and journal to which they are submitted, as defined in their mission statements. Frontiers reserves the right to guide an out-of-scope manuscript to a more suitable section or journal at any stage of peer review.
