SZodixStudyAcademic Library
DashboardShelvesOpen accessMy libraryInboxNotesWriteLearnAlerts
More
Ask your libraryNotificationsQuick citeReview
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Evaluating scientific research in Italy: The 2004–10 research evaluation exercise
16 references·16 citing·38 second hopsampled
Evaluating scientific research in Italy: The 2004–10 research evaluation exercise (2015)Evaluating scientific research in Italy: …Impact factor: outdated artefact or stepping-stone to journal certification? (2011)Impact factor: outdated artef…Citation Analysis: Comparison of Web of Science®, Scopus™, SciFinder®, and Google Scholar (2010)Citation Analysis: Comparison…Comparing bibliometric statistics obtained from the Web of Science and Scopus (2009)Comparing bibliometric statis…Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science (2006)Three options for citation tr…The Four Literatures of Social Science (2006)The Four Literatures of Socia…Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation (2005)Citation Analysis in Research…University Research Evaluation and Funding: An International Comparison (2003)University Research Evaluatio…Publishing as Prostitution? – Choosing Between One's Own Ideas and Academic Success (2003)Publishing as Prostitution? –…The Republic of Science: Its Political and Economic Theory (2000)The Republic of Science: Its …Universities as a Source of Commercial Technology: A Detailed Analysis of University Patenting, 1965–1988 (1998)Universities as a Source of C…R&D and Productivity (1998)R&D and ProductivityAdvanced bibliometric methods as quantitative core of peer review based evaluation and foresight exercises (1996)Advanced bibliometric methods…Academic research and industrial innovation (1991)Academic research and industr…The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data (1977)The Measurement of Observer A…The Republic of science (1962)The Republic of scienceA Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales (1960)A Coefficient of Agreement fo…The forced battle between peer-review and scientometric research assessment: Why the CoARA initiative is unsound (2024)The forced battle between pee…Examining the quality of the corresponding authorship field in Web of Science and Scopus (2024)Examining the quality of the …Do bibliometrics introduce gender, institutional or interdisciplinary biases into research evaluations? (2023)Do bibliometrics introduce ge…Use of the journal impact factor for assessing individual articles: Statistically flawed or not? [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] (2021)Use of the journal impact fac…Use of the journal impact factor for assessing individual articles: Statistically flawed or not? (2020)Use of the journal impact fac…Professional standards in bibliometric research evaluation? A meta-evaluation of European assessment practice 2005–2019 (2020)Professional standards in bib…Changing research on research evaluation: A critical literature review to revisit the agenda (2020)Changing research on research…Peer review versus bibliometrics: Which method better predicts the scholarly impact of publications? (2019)Peer review versus bibliometr…Providing meaningful information: Part B—Bibliometric analysis (2018)Providing meaningful informat…Toward an excellence-based research funding system: Evidence from Poland (2017)Toward an excellence-based re…Gender effects in research evaluation (2017)Gender effects in research ev…Critical remarks on the Italian research assessment exercise VQR 2011–2014 (2017)Critical remarks on the Itali…Факторы результативности научной деятельности: микроуровневый анализ (2016)Факторы результативности науч…Large-scale assessment of research outputs through a weighted combination of bibliometric indicators (2016)Large-scale assessment of res…How robust is journal rating in Humanities and Social Sciences? Evidence from a large-scale, multi-method exercise (2016)How robust is journal rating …Do they agree? Bibliometric evaluation versus informed peer review in the Italian research assessment exercise (2016)Do they agree? Bibliometric e…Citation Indexing-Its Theory and Application in Science, Technology, and Humanities (1980)Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research (1997)The History and Meaning of the Journal Impact Factor (2006)Which h-index? — A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar (2007)Comparison of SCImago journal rank indicator with journal impact factor (2008)A comparison of Scopus and Web of Science for a typical university (2009)Assessing basic research (1983)Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology (1988)The Changing Rationale for European University Research Funding: Are There Negative Unintended Consequences? (2001)Tertiary education for the knowledge society (2008)University corporatisation: Driving redefinition (2010)Transatlantic moves to the market: the United States and the European Union (2011)Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. (1994)The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. (1998)Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement (2015)RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2019)Increasing Returns and Long-Run Growth (1986)A Penny for Your Quotes: Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations (1990)Endogenous Technological Change (1990)The growth of patenting and licensing by U.S. universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh–Dole act of 1980 (2001)Entrepreneurship and Economic Growth (2006)International Journal of Business and Social Science (2018)Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses (2007)Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of science versus scopus and google scholar (2007)Large-scale analysis of the accuracy of the journal classification systems of Web of Science and Scopus (2016)Worldwide Research Trends on Wheat and Barley: A Bibliometric Comparative Analysis (2019)Why and how to merge Scopus and Web of Science during bibliometric analysis: the case of sales force literature from 1912 to 2019 (2020)A review of the literature on citation impact indicators (2016)Citations, Citation Indicators, and Research Quality: An Overview of Basic Concepts and Theories (2019)Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination (1992)Why We Disagree about Climate Change (2009)Developing a framework for responsible innovation (2013)Local Geographic Spillovers between University Research and High Technology Innovations (1997)Links and Impacts: The Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D (2002)Forms of knowledge and modes of innovation (2007)Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-Age Children-Present and Lifetime Version (K-SADS-PL): Initial Reliability and Validity Data (1997)Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic (2012)A Framework for Responsible Innovation (2013)
this work references cited by second hop· second hop is a sample of the most-cited connections

References

  • 1977The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data81,000 cited
  • 1960A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales42,335 cited
  • 2005Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation1,390 cited
  • 1998Universities as a Source of Commercial Technology: A Detailed Analysis of University Patenting, 1965–19881,305 cited
  • 1991Academic research and industrial innovation1,264 cited
  • 1962The Republic of science1,000 cited
  • 2009Comparing bibliometric statistics obtained from the Web of Science and Scopus832 cited
  • 2006Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science751 cited
  • 2003University Research Evaluation and Funding: An International Comparison635 cited
  • 2000The Republic of Science: Its Political and Economic Theory627 cited
  • 1998R&D and Productivity607 cited
  • 1996Advanced bibliometric methods as quantitative core of peer review based evaluation and foresight exercises383 cited
  • 2011Impact factor: outdated artefact or stepping-stone to journal certification?370 cited
  • 2006The Four Literatures of Social Science369 cited
  • 2003Publishing as Prostitution? – Choosing Between One's Own Ideas and Academic Success

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

296 cited
  • 2010Citation Analysis: Comparison of Web of Science®, Scopus™, SciFinder®, and Google Scholar266 cited
  • Cited by

    • 2020Changing research on research evaluation: A critical literature review to revisit the agenda75 cited
    • 2016Do they agree? Bibliometric evaluation versus informed peer review in the Italian research assessment exercise68 cited
    • 2017Toward an excellence-based research funding system: Evidence from Poland65 cited
    • 2020Professional standards in bibliometric research evaluation? A meta-evaluation of European assessment practice 2005–201965 cited
    • 2017Gender effects in research evaluation62 cited
    • 2017Critical remarks on the Italian research assessment exercise VQR 2011–201455 cited
    • 2019Peer review versus bibliometrics: Which method better predicts the scholarly impact of publications?50 cited
    • 2021Use of the journal impact factor for assessing individual articles: Statistically flawed or not? [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]49 cited
    • 2016How robust is journal rating in Humanities and Social Sciences? Evidence from a large-scale, multi-method exercise43 cited
    • 2020Use of the journal impact factor for assessing individual articles: Statistically flawed or not?39 cited
    • 2024The forced battle between peer-review and scientometric research assessment: Why the CoARA initiative is unsound35 cited
    • 2023Do bibliometrics introduce gender, institutional or interdisciplinary biases into research evaluations?33 cited
    • 2024Examining the quality of the corresponding authorship field in Web of Science and Scopus31 cited
    • 2016Факторы результативности научной деятельности: микроуровневый анализ28 cited
    • 2016Large-scale assessment of research outputs through a weighted combination of bibliometric indicators27 cited
    • 2018Providing meaningful information: Part B—Bibliometric analysis25 cited