Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Publications (10 of 45) Show all publications
Åström, F. & Hammarfelt, B. (2019). Conceptualising dimensions of bibliometric assessment: From resource allocation systems to evaluative landscapes. In: Catalano, Giuseppe; Daraio, Cinzia; Gregori, Martina; Moed, Henk F.; Ruocco, Giancarlo; (Ed.), Proceedings of the 17th Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics: . Paper presented at The 17th Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Rome, September 2-5, 2019. (pp. 1256-1261).
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Conceptualising dimensions of bibliometric assessment: From resource allocation systems to evaluative landscapes
2019 (English)In: Proceedings of the 17th Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics / [ed] Catalano, Giuseppe; Daraio, Cinzia; Gregori, Martina; Moed, Henk F.; Ruocco, Giancarlo;, 2019, p. 1256-1261Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the conceptualisation of bibliometric analyses in terms of the levels on which they are performed, adding contextual factors to the dimension where the size of the unit being analysed is considered. Based on empirical investigations of resource allocation systems and research evaluation practices, as well as the previous literature conceptualising bibliometric analyses, a framework based on Whitley’s (2000) notion of research fields as ‘reputational work organisations’, is discussed. The results suggest adding a contextual ‘reputational dimension’ to the size-based dimension distinguishing between micro-, meso- andmacro-level analyses. Furthermore, we propose that ‘evaluative landscapes’ (Brandter, 2017) might be a fruitful approach for further analysing how complex and multifaceted landscapes of research assessment affects the individual researcher.

National Category
Information Studies
Research subject
Library and Information Science
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-21757 (URN)978-88-3381-118-5 (ISBN)
Conference
The 17th Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Rome, September 2-5, 2019.
Projects
Riksbankens Jubileumsfond: The Swedish Foundation for the Social Sciences and Humanities (SGO14-1153:1).
Available from: 2019-10-15 Created: 2019-10-15 Last updated: 2019-10-16Bibliographically approved
Hammarfelt, B. (2019). Discipline. ISKO Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Discipline
2019 (English)In: ISKO Encyclopedia of Knowledge OrganizationArticle, review/survey (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Discipline is commonly used to denote particular areas of knowledge, research and education. Yet, the concept is often not very well defined or even explicitly discussed when used in knowledge organization and related fields. The aim of this article is to encourage and facilitate further reflections on academic disciplines, while at the same time offering insights on how this elusive concept might be understood. An overarching argument is that discipline should foremost be understood in relation to institutional and organizational features and this is what distinguishes it from related terms such as, fielddomain or topic. The paper reviews the etymology and history of the concept, it discusses attempts to define and conceptualise disciplines and it offers insights on how disciplines can be studied. Regardless of our views of disciplines, either as inherently out-dated constructs or as important features of a well-functioning academia, it is concluded that further precision or care in explicating the concept is needed.

National Category
Information Studies
Research subject
Library and Information Science
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-21859 (URN)
Available from: 2019-10-15 Created: 2019-10-15 Last updated: 2019-10-16Bibliographically approved
Haddow, G. & Hammarfelt, B. (2019). Early career academics and evaluative metrics:: ambivalence, resistance and strategies. In: Fabian Cannizzo & Nick Osbaldiston (Ed.), The Social Structures of Global Academia: (pp. 125-143). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Early career academics and evaluative metrics:: ambivalence, resistance and strategies
2019 (English)In: The Social Structures of Global Academia / [ed] Fabian Cannizzo & Nick Osbaldiston, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 2019, p. 125-143Chapter in book (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Measures of research productivity and quality are key components of academic life, and a successful academic career is heavily dependent on meeting quantified performance standards. For many years citation-based measures like the Impact Factor dominated the metrics landscape, but in the last two decades a swathe of new evaluation tools have emerged, including the h-index, ranked journal lists, and altmetrics. While the effectiveness of these metrics is debatable across many disciplines, their use in the social sciences and humanities has attracted most criticism. This chapter is concerned with how early career academics are using and responding to evaluative metrics; their strategies and ambitions for the future, and their perceptions of how evaluative metrics influence their work. In-depth interviews with Australian academics in the social sciences and humanities allowed us to explore these questions and we are particularly interested in how competing ‘orders of worth’ come to the fore in these accounts, and how researchers negotiate rivalling demands and expectations. Drawing on Brandtner’s concept of ‘evaluative landscapes’, we suggest that metrics and indicators can be seen as signposts which are used to assess achievement and to navigate a pathway to an ‘idealised sense of self’.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 2019
Series
Routledge advances in sociology ; 262
Keywords
Early career academics, social sciences, humanities, metrics, evaluation
National Category
Information Studies
Research subject
Library and Information Science
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-16063 (URN)9781138610125 (ISBN)
Funder
Riksbankens Jubileumsfond, SGO14–1153:1
Available from: 2019-04-29 Created: 2019-04-29 Last updated: 2019-04-29Bibliographically approved
Pölönen, J. & Hammarfelt, B. (2019). Historical bibliometrics using Google Scholar: The case of Roman law, 1500-2016. In: Catalano, Giuseppe; Daraio, Cinzia; Gregori, Martina; Moed, Henk F.; Ruocco, Giancarlo; (Ed.), Proceedings of the 17th Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics: . Paper presented at The 17th Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Rome, 2-5 September, 2019. (pp. 2491-2492).
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Historical bibliometrics using Google Scholar: The case of Roman law, 1500-2016
2019 (English)In: Proceedings of the 17th Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics / [ed] Catalano, Giuseppe; Daraio, Cinzia; Gregori, Martina; Moed, Henk F.; Ruocco, Giancarlo;, 2019, p. 2491-2492Conference paper, Poster (with or without abstract) (Refereed)
National Category
Information Studies
Research subject
Library and Information Science
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-21857 (URN)978-88-3381-118-5 (ISBN)
Conference
The 17th Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Rome, 2-5 September, 2019.
Available from: 2019-10-15 Created: 2019-10-15 Last updated: 2019-10-16Bibliographically approved
Haddow, G. & Hammarfelt, B. (2019). Quality, impact, and quantification: Indicators and metrics use by social scientists. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 70(1), 16-26
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Quality, impact, and quantification: Indicators and metrics use by social scientists
2019 (English)In: Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, ISSN 2330-1635, E-ISSN 2330-1643, Vol. 70, no 1, p. 16-26Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The use of indicators and metrics for research evaluation purposes is well‐documented; however, less is known about their use by individual scholars. With a focus on the social sciences, this article contributes to the existing literature on indicators and metrics use in fields with diverse publication practices. Scholars in Australia and Sweden were asked about their use and reasons for using metrics. A total of 581 completed surveys were analyzed to generate descriptive statistics, with textual analysis performed on comments provided to open questions. While just under half of the participant group had used metrics, the Australians reported use in twice the proportion of their Swedish peers. Institutional policies and processes were frequently associated with use, and the scholars' comments suggest a high level of awareness of some metrics as well as strategic behavior in demonstrating research performance. There is also evidence of tensions between scholars' research evaluation environment and their disciplinary values and publication practices.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
John Wiley & Sons, 2019
National Category
Information Studies
Research subject
Library and Information Science
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-15458 (URN)10.1002/asi.24097 (DOI)000453036700002 ()2-s2.0-85056619075 (Scopus ID)
Funder
Riksbankens Jubileumsfond, SGO14-1153:1
Available from: 2018-12-13 Created: 2018-12-13 Last updated: 2019-01-09Bibliographically approved
Schirone, M., Hammarfelt, B. & Nelhans, G. (Eds.). (2018). 23rd Nordic Workshop on Bibliometrics and Research Policy 2018 Book of abstracts. Paper presented at 23rd Nordic Workshop on Bibliometrics and Research Policy 2018, November 7-9, 2018. Borås: Högskolan i Borås
Open this publication in new window or tab >>23rd Nordic Workshop on Bibliometrics and Research Policy 2018 Book of abstracts
2018 (English)Conference proceedings (editor) (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Initiated by Professors Olle Persson and Peter Ingwersen, bibliometric researchers in the Nordic countries have arranged annual Nordic workshops on bibliometrics since 1996. The general scope of the Nordic Workshop on Bibliometrics and Research Policy is to present recent bibliometric research in the Nordic countries, to create better linkages between the bibliometric research groups and their PhD students, and to link bibliometric research with research policy.The workshop language is English and the workshop is open to participants from any nation. The 23rd Nordic Workshop on Bibliometrics and Research Policy (NWB’2018) was organized by the Swedish School of Library and Information Science (SSLIS) at University of Borås, Sweden. It was held at University of Borås, on November 7-9th, 2018 with 100 participants.In total, we received 35 submissions. After reviewing the submissions, the program committee decided which papers were to be presented orally and which as poster presentations. 21 papers were accepted as oral presentations. These, as well as the titles of the two invited keynote talks and the abstracts of 9 posters, are presented as abstracts in these proceedings. The posters and oral presentation slides are also available for viewing and peer-feedback at figshare (with citable DOIs):https://doi.orgWe would like to thank all authors for their submissions, the session chairs and the keynote speakers, Fredrik Åström and Merle Jacob, for their contributions to the workshop and the student volunteers, for their diligent efforts during the workshop. Further, we would like to thank the sponsors for their generous financial support, without which the Nordic workshops could not be organised in their current form.The NWB’2017 website is at https://hb.se/nwb2018Follow on twitter as @nwb_2018 and #nwb2018

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Borås: Högskolan i Borås, 2018. p. 42
Keywords
#NWB2018, Nordic Workshop on Bibliometrics and Research Policy, 7-9 November 2018, Bibliometrics, Informetrics, Research policy
National Category
Information Studies
Research subject
Library and Information Science
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-15403 (URN)10.6084/m9.figshare.7411559 (DOI)
Conference
23rd Nordic Workshop on Bibliometrics and Research Policy 2018, November 7-9, 2018
Available from: 2018-12-03 Created: 2018-12-03 Last updated: 2019-01-09Bibliographically approved
Wallenburg, I., Kaltenbrunner, W., Hammarfelt, B., de Rijcke, S. & Bal, R. (2018). Advancing to the Next Level: Caring for Evaluative Metrics Monsters in Academia and Healthcare. In: Schultze U., Aanestad M., Mähring M., Østerlund C., Riemer K. (Ed.), Living with Monsters?  IS&O 2018.: Social Implications of Algorithmic Phenomena, Hybrid Agency, and the Performativity of Technology.. Paper presented at FIP 8.2 Working Conference: Living with Monsters, San Franciso, 11-12 December, 2018. Springer, 543
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Advancing to the Next Level: Caring for Evaluative Metrics Monsters in Academia and Healthcare
Show others...
2018 (English)In: Living with Monsters?  IS&O 2018.: Social Implications of Algorithmic Phenomena, Hybrid Agency, and the Performativity of Technology. / [ed] Schultze U., Aanestad M., Mähring M., Østerlund C., Riemer K., Springer, 2018, Vol. 543Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

In this paper we use the notions of play and (finite and infinite) games to analyze performance management practices in professional work. Whilst evaluative metrics are often described as ‘monsters’ impacting on professional work, we illustrate how metrics can also become part of practices of caring for such work. Analyzing the use of evaluative metrics in law faculties and in hospitals, we show how finite games – games played to win – and infinite games – games played for the purpose of continuing to play – are intertwined and how this intertwinement affects academic and healthcare work.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer, 2018
Series
Advances in Information and Communication Technology
Keywords
Gamification, Performance management, Universities Health care
National Category
Information Studies
Research subject
Library and Information Science
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-15400 (URN)10.1007/978-3-030-04091-8_7 (DOI)978-3-030-04090-1 (ISBN)
Conference
FIP 8.2 Working Conference: Living with Monsters, San Franciso, 11-12 December, 2018
Available from: 2018-12-03 Created: 2018-12-03 Last updated: 2018-12-03Bibliographically approved
Hammarfelt, B. & Haddow, G. (2018). Conflicting Measures and Values: How Humanities Scholars in Australia and Sweden Use and React to Bibliometric Indicators. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 69(7), 924-935
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Conflicting Measures and Values: How Humanities Scholars in Australia and Sweden Use and React to Bibliometric Indicators
2018 (English)In: Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, ISSN 2330-1635, E-ISSN 2330-1643, Vol. 69, no 7, p. 924-935Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

While bibliometric indicators, such as the journal impact factor, have long played an important role in many STEM disciplines it has been repeatedly shown that established bibliometric methods have limited use in the humanities. Using a questionnaire on metrics use and publication practices in Australia and Sweden, we tested the assumption that indicators play a minor role among humanities scholars. Our findings show that our respondents use indicators to a considerable degree, with a range of indicators and rankings being employed. The scholars use metrics as part of institutional policy, in CVs and applications, as well as for general promotion of their work. Notable in our results is that a much larger share of researchers (62%) in Australia used metrics compared to Sweden (14%). Scholar’s attitudes regarding bibliometrics are mixed; many are critical of these measures, while at the same time feeling pressured to use them. One main tension described by our respondents is between intradisciplinary criteria of quality and formalized indicators, and negotiating these “orders of worth” is a challenging balancing act, especially for younger researchers.

Keywords
Humanities, bibliometrics, evaluation, indicators
National Category
Information Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-14324 (URN)DOI: 10.1002/asi.24043 (DOI)
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 2013-7368
Available from: 2018-06-12 Created: 2018-06-12 Last updated: 2018-07-04Bibliographically approved
Hammarfelt, B. (2018). Från sorterandets logik till mätandets praktik: Bibliometrin och forskningsbibliotekens framtid. In: Joacim Hansson & Per Wisselgren (Ed.), Bibliotekarier i teori och praktik: Utbildningsperspektiv på en unik profession (pp. 149-167). Lund: BTJ Förlag
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Från sorterandets logik till mätandets praktik: Bibliometrin och forskningsbibliotekens framtid
2018 (Swedish)In: Bibliotekarier i teori och praktik: Utbildningsperspektiv på en unik profession / [ed] Joacim Hansson & Per Wisselgren, Lund: BTJ Förlag , 2018, p. 149-167Chapter in book (Other academic)
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Lund: BTJ Förlag, 2018
National Category
Information Studies
Research subject
Library and Information Science
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-14300 (URN)9789170188213 (ISBN)
Available from: 2018-06-01 Created: 2018-06-01 Last updated: 2018-07-04Bibliographically approved
Hammarfelt, B. (2018). Taking Comfort in Points: The Appeal of the Norwegian Model in Sweden. Journal of Data and Information Science, 3(4), 84-94
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Taking Comfort in Points: The Appeal of the Norwegian Model in Sweden
2018 (English)In: Journal of Data and Information Science, ISSN ISSN 2096-157X, Vol. 3, no 4, p. 84-94Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Purpose: The “Norwegian model” has become widely used for assessment and resource

allocation purposes. This paper investigates why this model has becomes so widespread and

influential.

Approach: A theoretical background is outlined in which the reduction of “uncertainty” is

highlighted as a key feature of performance measurement systems. These theories are then

drawn upon when revisiting previous studies of the Norwegian model, its use, and reactions

to it, in Sweden.

Findings: The empirical examples, which concern more formal use on the level of universities

as well as responses from individual researchers, shows how particular parts—especially the

“publication indicator”—are employed in Swedish academia. The discussion posits that the

attractiveness of the Norwegian model largely can be explained by its ability to reduce

complexity and uncertainty, even in fields where traditional bibliometric measurement is less

applicable.

Research limitations: The findings presented should be regarded as examples that can be

used for discussion, but one should be careful to interpret these as representative for broader

sentiments and trends.

Implications: The sheer popularity of the Norwegian model, leading to its application in

contexts for which it was not designed, can be seen as a major challenge for the future.

Originality: This paper offers a novel perspective on the Norwegian model by focusing on

its general “appeal”, rather than on its design, use or (mis)-use.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
De Gruyter: , 2018
Keywords
The Norwegian model, Sweden, Uncertainty, Bibliometric indicators, Assessment systems
National Category
Information Studies
Research subject
Library and Information Science
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-15444 (URN)10.2478/jdis-2018-0023 (DOI)
Funder
Riksbankens Jubileumsfond, SGO14-1153:1
Available from: 2018-12-11 Created: 2018-12-11 Last updated: 2018-12-28Bibliographically approved
Organisations
Identifiers
ORCID iD: ORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0002-1504-8395

Search in DiVA

Show all publications