2 Lost in Quantification: Scholars and the Politics of Bibliometrics

Abstract

As scholarship becomes increasingly globalized, bibliometric systems for quantifying research productivity have become increasingly relevant to academia. Bibliometric indicators are used to convert information about research activity (primarily publications and citations) into numbers that, in their apparent neutrality, seem to transcend linguistic and cultural (including disciplinary) boundaries. Developed as a way to study academic publication and citation patterns statistically, bibliometrics were originally used mostly for research purposes – to substantiate claims about who produces what and under which circumstances. Today, however, bibliometrics are most familiar to scholars as evaluative devices. Bibliometric indicators are used to assess research performance not only at the institutional level, but increasingly at the individual level in the context of hiring or promotion decisions. The aim of this chapter is to look at bibliometrics as a specific instance of quantification, and thus – as with any other form of quantification – as a form of governing things and people. The politics of bibliometrics deserve to be unpacked because even with the best intentions, developers of bibliometric indicators must make non-trivial decisions about how to measure things that are notoriously difficult to quantify.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 42 citations exist upstream.