How the Existence of a Regional Bibliographic Information System can Help Evaluators to Conform to the Principles of the Leiden Manifesto

10.6120/JoEMLS.2017.541/0011.BC.AC

Frederik Verleysen；Ronald Rousseau

Leiden manifesto ； Regional bibliographic information system ； Flanders ； Research evaluation ； Performance-based research funding

教育資料與圖書館學

54卷1期（2017 / 03 / 01）

97 - 109

英文

It is shown that the use of Flanders' regional bibliographic information system in a performance-based research funding system corresponds to a large extent with the principles of the Leiden Manifesto. Yet, it is argued that there is still room for improvement. We offer this Flemish perspective on the Leiden Manifesto as a suggestion to colleagues worldwide to compare their local bibliographic information systems with the principles set forth in the Leiden Manifesto.

1. DORA. (2012). San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA). Retrieved from http://www.ascb.org/dora/
2. Aagaard, K.,Bloch, C.,Schneider, J. W.(2015).Impacts of performance-besed research funding systems: The case of the Norwegian publication indicator.Research Evaluation,24(2),106-117.
3. Abramo, G.,D'Angelo, C. A.(2011).Evaluating research: From informed peer review to bibliometrics.Scientometrics,87(3),499-514.
4. Bloch, C.,Schneider, J. W.(2016).Performance-based funding models and researcher behavior: An analysis of the influence of the Norwegian publication indicator at the individual level.Research Evaluation,25(4),371-382.
5. Bornmann, L.,Haunschild, R.(2016).To what extent does the leiden manifesto also apply to altmetrics? A discussion of the manifesto against the background of research into altmetrics.Online Information Review,40(4),529-543.
6. Broadbent, J.(2010).The UK Research Assessment Exercise: Performance measurement and resource allocation.Australian Accounting Review,20(1),14-23.
7. Butler, L.(2003).Modifying publication practices in response to funding formulas.Research Evaluation,12(1),39-46.
8. Butler, L.(2003).Explaining Australia's increased share of ISI publications - The effects of a funding formula based on publication counts.Research Policy,32(1),143-155.
9. Butler, L.,McAllister, I.(2011).Evaluating university research performance metrics.European Political Science,10(1),44-58.
10. David, D.,Frangopol, P.(2015).The lost paradise, the original sin, and the Dodo bird: A scientometrics Sapere Aude manifesto as a reply to the Leiden manifesto on scientometrics.Scientometrics,105(3),2255-2257.
11. Debackere, K.,Glänzel, W.(2004).Using a bibliometric approach to support research policy making: The case of the Flemish BOF-key.Scientometrics,59(2),253-276.
12. Engels, T. C. E.,Goos, P.,Dexters, N.,Spruyt, E. H. J.(2013).Group size, h-index, and efficiency in publishing in top journals explain expert panel assessments of research group quality and productivity.Research Evaluation,22(4),224-236.
13. Giménez-Toledo, E.,Manana-Rodriguez, J.,Engels, T. C. E.,Ingwersen, P.,Pölönen, J.,Sivertsen, G.,Zuccala, A.(2016).Taking scholarly books into account: Current developments in five European countries.Scientometrics,107(2),685-699.
14. Glänzel, W.,Wouters, P.(2013).The do's and don'ts in individual level bibliometrics.14th International Society of Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference,Vienna, Austria:
15. Guns, R.,Engels, T. C. E.(2016).Effects of performance-based research funding on publication patterns in the social sciences and humanities.Proceedings of the 21st international conference on science and technology indicators,València, Spain:
16. Hammarfelt, B.,de Rijcke, S.(2015).Accountability in context: Effects of research evaluation systems on publication practices, disciplinary norms and individual working routines in the faculty of arts at Uppsala University.Research Evaluation,24(1),63-77.
17. Hansson, F.(2010).Dialogue in or with peer review? Evaluating research organizations in order to promote organizational learning.Science and Public Policy,37(4),239-251.
18. Hicks, D.(2012).Performance-based university research funding systems.Research Policy,41(2),251-261.
19. Hicks, D.,Wouters, P.,Waltman, L.,de Rijcke, S.,Rafols, I.(2015).The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics.Nature,520(7548),429-431.
20. Martin, B. R.(2011).The Research Excellence Framework and the 'impact agenda': Are we creating a Frankenstein monster?.Research Evaluation,20(3),247-254.
21. Ossenblok, T. L. B.(2016).Antwerp,University of Antwerp.
22. Ossenblok, T. L. B.,Engels, T. C. E.,Sivertsen, G.(2012).The representation of the social sciences and humanities in the Web of Science. A comparison of publication patterns and incentive structures in Flanders and Norway (2005-9).Research Evaluation,21(4),280-290.
23. Rons, N.,De Bruyn, A.,Cornelis, J.(2008).Research evaluation per discipline: A peer-review method and its outcomes.Research Evaluation,17(1),45-57.
24. Seglen, P. O.(1992).The skewness of science.Journal of the American Society for Information Science,43(9),628-638.
25. Spruyt, E.,Engels, T.(2013).Nieuwe sleutel verdeling van middelen Bijzonder Onderzoeksfonds.Thema: Tijdschrift voor Hoger Onderwijs en Management,13(3),56-61.
26. Verleysen, F. T.(2016).Antwerp, Belgium,University of Antwerp.
27. Verleysen, F. T.,Engels, T. C. E.(2013).A label for peer-reviewed books.Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,64(2),428-430.
28. Verleysen, F. T.,Engels, T. C. E.(2014).Internationalization of peer reviewed and non-peer reviewed book publications in the social sciences and humanities.Scientometrics,101(2),1431-1444.
29. Verleysen, F. T.,Ghesquière, P.,Engels, T. C. E.(2014).The objectives, design and selection process of the Flemish Academic Bibliographic Database for the Social Sciences and Humanities (VABB-SHW).Bibliometrics: Use and abuse in the review of research performance,London, UK:
30. Westerheijden, D. F.(1997).A solid base for decisions. Use of the VSNU research evaluations in Dutch universities.Higher Education,33(4),397-413.