[pkl] Science Metrics

[oliver]

IMHO interessanter Artikel zur Wissenschafts-Vermessung
hier kurze Text-Ausschnitte:



The mismeasurement of science
  (Michael Nielsen):


  "(...) Of course, the problem is that while it may be near-impossible to
  accurately evaluate scientific work, as a practical matter we are forced to
  make such evaluations. Every time a committee decides to award or decline a
  grant, or to hire or not hire a scientist, they are making a judgement about
  the relative worth of different scientific work. And so our society has
  evolved a mix of customs and institutions and technologies to answer the
  fundamental question: how should we allocate resources to science? The answer
  we give to that question is changing rapidly today, as metrics such as
  citation count and the h-index take on a more prominent role. In 2006, for
  example, the UK Government proposed changing their research assessment
  exercise so that it could be done in a largely automated fashion, using
  citation-based metrics. The proposal was eventually dropped, but nonetheless
  the UK proposal is a good example of the rise of metrics.
  (...) 
  In this essay I argue that heavy reliance on a small number of metrics is bad
  for science.
  (...)
  In this section, I describe three ways centralized metrics can inhibit
  science.
  (...)
  Centralized metrics suppress cognitive diversity
  (...)
  No matter what the metric, it’ll suppress cognitive diversity. And that may
  mean suppressing knowledge crucial to solving the problem at hand.
  (...)
  Centralized metrics create perverse incentives
  (...)
  Centralized metrics misallocate resources (...)"



Kompletter Artikel zum Quantifizierungs-Wahn hier:

    http://michaelnielsen.org/blog/the-mismeasurement-of-science/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+michaelnielsen%2Fwmna+%28Michael+Nielsen%29


Gruß,
   Oliver