State Paternalism: from Science to Scientometrics

A. Rubinstein
{"title":"State Paternalism: from Science to Scientometrics","authors":"A. Rubinstein","doi":"10.17835/2076-6297.2021.13.3.020-036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article presents the results of the study of public opinion in the context of science reforming. The adoption of the Law on the Russian Academy of Sciences has in fact liquidated academic freedoms and consolidated state interference into scientific life by simultaneously escalating the use of Scientometrics. Respondents' assessments of the use of Scientometric indicators and journal rankings indicate that most economists do not trust the Scientometric tools. Based on the results of a sociological survey of the community of economists in 2020, the article concludes that there is a \"managerial failure\" of the paternalistic state. An analysis of the Scientometric indicators used in Scopus is also presented, including three well-known metrics: CiteScore\", SNIP, and SCImago (SJR). In addition to the description of the sample of journals and the scale of monitoring, the author presents the criterion of ranking the journals MWR and the algorithm of its definition in comparison with the SJR indicator in Scopus. The final part of the paper discusses the econometric model based on the hypothesis that there are links between the ranking of journals, obtained on the basis of a sociological survey of economists, and the estimates of the \"usefulness\" of the introduction of relevant Scientometric indicators by the same respondents. The calculations performed have confirmed the formulated hypothesis and allowed to quantitatively measure the impact of the respondents' attitude to Scientometric indicators on the value of private ratings reflecting the Scientific level of the journal, the public prestige of the journal and Interest in the journal publications.","PeriodicalId":43842,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Institutional Studies","volume":"44 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Institutional Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17835/2076-6297.2021.13.3.020-036","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The article presents the results of the study of public opinion in the context of science reforming. The adoption of the Law on the Russian Academy of Sciences has in fact liquidated academic freedoms and consolidated state interference into scientific life by simultaneously escalating the use of Scientometrics. Respondents' assessments of the use of Scientometric indicators and journal rankings indicate that most economists do not trust the Scientometric tools. Based on the results of a sociological survey of the community of economists in 2020, the article concludes that there is a "managerial failure" of the paternalistic state. An analysis of the Scientometric indicators used in Scopus is also presented, including three well-known metrics: CiteScore", SNIP, and SCImago (SJR). In addition to the description of the sample of journals and the scale of monitoring, the author presents the criterion of ranking the journals MWR and the algorithm of its definition in comparison with the SJR indicator in Scopus. The final part of the paper discusses the econometric model based on the hypothesis that there are links between the ranking of journals, obtained on the basis of a sociological survey of economists, and the estimates of the "usefulness" of the introduction of relevant Scientometric indicators by the same respondents. The calculations performed have confirmed the formulated hypothesis and allowed to quantitatively measure the impact of the respondents' attitude to Scientometric indicators on the value of private ratings reflecting the Scientific level of the journal, the public prestige of the journal and Interest in the journal publications.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
国家家长制:从科学到科学计量学
本文介绍了科学改革背景下的民意研究成果。《俄罗斯科学院法》的通过实际上扼杀了学术自由,并通过同时升级科学计量学的使用,巩固了国家对科学生活的干预。受访者对科学计量指标和期刊排名使用情况的评估表明,大多数经济学家不相信科学计量工具。根据2020年对经济学家社区的社会学调查结果,文章得出结论,家长式国家存在“管理失败”。本文还分析了Scopus中使用的科学计量学指标,包括三个著名的指标:CiteScore、SNIP和SCImago (SJR)。除了对期刊样本和监测规模的描述外,作者还提出了期刊MWR的排名标准及其定义算法,并与Scopus中的SJR指标进行了比较。论文的最后一部分讨论了计量经济学模型,该模型基于一个假设,即根据经济学家的社会学调查得出的期刊排名与同一受访者对引入相关科学计量指标的“有用性”的估计之间存在联系。所进行的计算证实了制定的假设,并允许定量测量受访者对科学计量指标的态度对反映期刊科学水平的私人评级价值的影响,期刊的公众声望和对期刊出版物的兴趣。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
33.30%
发文量
24
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
On Intra-Group Allocative Efficiency of Resources in Industrial Business Models The Role of Non-Rooted Social Institutions in the Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Regional Innovation System Empirical Analysis of Cheating Among Students on the Basis of Surveys Factors of the Emergence of Collective Actions of Russian Healthcare Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic Budgetary Borrowings and Investments in Russian Regions: Regulatory Issues and Opportunities for Enhancement
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1