h指数及其一些替代指标是否会对教师的认识论信念和方法论偏好产生歧视?以魁北克的社会科学家为例。

Are the h-index and some of its alternatives discriminatory of epistemological beliefs and methodological preferences of faculty members? The case of social scientists in Quebec.

作者信息

Ouimet Mathieu, Bédard Pierre-Olivier, Gélineau François

出版信息

Scientometrics. 2011 Jul;88(1):91-106. doi: 10.1007/s11192-011-0364-3. Epub 2011 Mar 29.

Abstract

This exploratory study aims at answering the following research question: Are the h-index and some of its derivatives discriminatory when applied to rank social scientists with different epistemological beliefs and methodological preferences? This study reports the results of five Tobit and two negative binomial regression models taking as dependent variable the h-index and six of its derivatives, using a dataset combining bibliometric data collected with the PoP software with cross-sectional data of 321 Quebec social scientists in Anthropology, Sociology, Social Work, Political Science, Economics and Psychology. The results reveal an epistemological/methodological effect making positivists and quantitativists globally more productive than constructivists and qualitativists.

摘要

这项探索性研究旨在回答以下研究问题

当应用h指数及其一些衍生指标对具有不同认识论信念和方法论偏好的社会科学家进行排名时,它们是否具有区分性?本研究报告了五个托宾模型和两个负二项回归模型的结果,这些模型以h指数及其六个衍生指标作为因变量,使用了一个数据集,该数据集将通过PoP软件收集的文献计量数据与321名魁北克人类学家、社会学家、社会工作者、政治学家、经济学家和心理学家的横断面数据相结合。结果揭示了一种认识论/方法论效应,即实证主义者和定量研究者总体上比建构主义者和定性研究者更有产出。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索