Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Eval Rev. 2006 Aug;30(4):505-32.

The imprecise science of evaluating scholarly performance: utilizing broad quality categories for an assessment of business and management journals.

Author information

1
Faculty of Business, Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand.

Abstract

In a growing number of countries, government-appointed assessment panels develop ranks on the basis of the quality of scholarly outputs to apportion budgets in recognition of evaluated performance and to justify public funds for future R&D activities. When business and management journals are being grouped in broad quality categories, a recent study has noted that this procedure was placing the same journals in essentially the same categories. Drawing on journal quality categorizations by several German- and English-speaking business departments and academic associations, the author performs nonparametric tests and correlations to analyze whether this claim can be substantiated. In particular, he examines the ability of broad quality categorizations to add value to governmental, administrative, and academic decision making by withstanding the criticism traditionally levied at research quality assessments.

PMID:
16807434
DOI:
10.1177/0193841X05284088
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Atypon
    Loading ...
    Support Center