Editorial Statements
نویسنده
چکیده
The quantitative evaluation and intercompatisun of scientific activity, productivity and prognss seems to be sheer nonsense for many, perhaps for the majority of active scientists. This attitude is quite natural, but its source is mainly prejudice, ignorance and/or misunderstanding of the basic ideas of scientometrics. The skeptics are scornful of the hopeless aim of measuring the unmeasurable. me tremendous increase of the scientific production over the last decades has made the emergence of this new field of science both necessary and possible. The necessity follows from the industrialization of scientific research (which by no means diminishes the importance of the individual): the heavily needed and dbstantial frnancial support cannot be based solely upon subjective judgement. This is of particular importance at present when the extensive evolution of scientific research has just about ended. Scientometrics may help in the more economical and balanced utilization of the available funds, thus increasing the efficiency of research. The possibility is provided by the development of computerized systems for the cataloguing and processing of information concerning the results of scientific research, as well as by the accumulation of a huge amount of such data, permitting a statistically meaningful evaluation. There are two possible dangers associated with the emergence of a new approach like scientornetrics. Both the overestimation and underrating of its potential should be avoided. I am convinced that, although scientometrics is neither an omnipotent diagnostic tool, nor a panacea, it can be most instrumental in revealing and solving a variety of problems in science. This approach certainly has its limitations and one of our objectives is to explore and recognize these limits.
منابع مشابه
Correction: Clinical Practice Guidelines and Consensus Statements in Oncology – An Assessment of Their Methodological Quality
BACKGROUND Consensus statements and clinical practice guidelines are widely available for enhancing the care of cancer patients. Despite subtle differences in their definition and purpose, these terms are often used interchangeably. We systematically assessed the methodological quality of consensus statements and clinical practice guidelines published in three commonly read, geographically dive...
متن کاملAn international survey and modified Delphi process revealed editors’ perceptions, training needs, and ratings of competency-related statements for the development of core competencies for scientific editors of biomedical journals
Background: Scientific editors (i.e., those who make decisions on the content and policies of a journal) have a central role in the editorial process at biomedical journals. However, very little is known about the training needs of these editors or what competencies are required to perform effectively in this role. Methods: We conducted a survey of perceptions and training needs among scientifi...
متن کاملProblems from the Workshops on Low Eigenvalues of Laplace and Schrödinger Operators
Following are brief statements of some problems raised during the AIM Workshop on Low Eigenvalues of Laplace and Schrödinger Operators, May 22–26, 2006, and the MFO Oberwolfach, February 9–13, 2009. The name of the participant who mentioned the problem is stated in most cases, along with a brief reference to more information. This participant is not necessarily the original proposer of the prob...
متن کاملImpact Aspirations of MIS Journals: An Ontological Analysis
Journal impact is an ill-structured, complex construct. Present bibliometric and survey measures do not capture it fully. The paper deconstructs the combinatorial complexity of the construct using an ontology which encapsulates 2500 potential components of the construct. The ontology is a parsimonious, systemic, and systematic representation of journal impact. The paper presents an ontological ...
متن کاملRelationship between Quality and Editorial Leadership of Biomedical Research Journals: A Comparative Study of Italian and UK Journals
BACKGROUND The quality of biomedical reporting is guided by statements of several organizations. Although not all journals adhere to these guidelines, those that do demonstrate "editorial leadership" in their author community. To investigate a possible relationship between editorial leadership and journal quality, research journals from two European countries, one Anglophone and one non-Angloph...
متن کامل