{"title":"重议科研评估中的质与量之争","authors":"Jiban K. Pal","doi":"10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16682","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The debate on quality versus quantity is still persistent for methodological considerations. These two approaches are highly contrasting in their epistemology and contrary to each other. A single composite indicator that reasonably senses both quality and quantity would be significant toward performance. This paper evaluates the potency of the combined metric for quality assessment of publications (QP) in India’s National Institutional Research Framework (NIRF) exercise in 2020. It also suggests a potential improvement in quality measurement to obtain the rankings more rationally with finer tunings.","PeriodicalId":44921,"journal":{"name":"DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reframing the Debate on Quality vs Quantity in Research Assessment\",\"authors\":\"Jiban K. Pal\",\"doi\":\"10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16682\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The debate on quality versus quantity is still persistent for methodological considerations. These two approaches are highly contrasting in their epistemology and contrary to each other. A single composite indicator that reasonably senses both quality and quantity would be significant toward performance. This paper evaluates the potency of the combined metric for quality assessment of publications (QP) in India’s National Institutional Research Framework (NIRF) exercise in 2020. It also suggests a potential improvement in quality measurement to obtain the rankings more rationally with finer tunings.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44921,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-02-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16682\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16682","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Reframing the Debate on Quality vs Quantity in Research Assessment
The debate on quality versus quantity is still persistent for methodological considerations. These two approaches are highly contrasting in their epistemology and contrary to each other. A single composite indicator that reasonably senses both quality and quantity would be significant toward performance. This paper evaluates the potency of the combined metric for quality assessment of publications (QP) in India’s National Institutional Research Framework (NIRF) exercise in 2020. It also suggests a potential improvement in quality measurement to obtain the rankings more rationally with finer tunings.
期刊介绍：
DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology publishes original research and review papers related to library science and IT applied to library activities, services, and products. Major subject fields covered include: Information systems, Knowledge management, Collection building & management, Information behaviour & retrieval, Librarianship/library management, Library & information services, Records management & preservation, etc.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
