nnAs mentioned before I work on a literature review focusing on criteria for assessing the quality of scientific documents. As I found in the Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar very few literature on cognitive construction processes or relevant content-related parameters that make articles seem to be of high quality I asked in a recent posting for support by the readers of this blog.nnOne reader, Dr. Werner Dees, actually sent me very, very valuable tips. The complete list of the reviewed literature can be found below as text and downloaded as a BibTEx-file.nnThe articles I found most useful are Mårtensson, P., Fors, U., Wallin, S.-B., Zander, U., & Nilsson, G. H. (2016). and especially Bucholz (1995), the latter being a recommendation of Dr. Dees.n
- n
- Basta, H. (n.d.). Evaluating Empirical Research. Retrieved from https://www.antioch.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/VWC-RESOURCE_evaluating-empirical-research.pdf
- Bouter, L. M. (2008). Knowledge as Public Property : The Societal Relevance of Scientific Research. Higher Education Management and Policy, (September).nBruza, P., & Chang, V. (2014). Perceptions of document relevance. Frontiers in Psychology, 5(JUL), 1–8. http://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00612
- Buchholz, K. (1995). Criteria for the analysis of scientific quality. Scientometrics, 32(2), 195–218. http://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016894
- Clyde, L. A. (2004). Evaluating the quality of research publications: A pilot study of school librarianship. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 55(13), 1119–1130. http://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20066
- Greenhalgh, T. (1997). How to read a paper: Assessing the methodological quality of published papers. BMJ, 315(7103), 305–308. http://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7103.305
- Harris, M., Macinko, J., Jimenez, G., Mahfoud, M., & Anderson, C. (2015). Does a research article’s country of origin affect perception of its quality and relevance? A national trial of US public health researchers. BMJ Open, 5(12). http://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008993
- Johnson, M. (2013). What is good research? International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 43(8), ijpdlm.2013.00543haa.001. http://doi.org/10.1108/ijpdlm.2013.00543haa.001
- Judge, T. A., Cable, D. M., Colbert, A. E., & Rynes, S. L. (2007). What causes a management article to be cited – article, author, or journal? Academy of Management Journal, 50(3), 491–506. http://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2007.25525577
- Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen KNAW. (2010). Quality assessment in the design and engineering disciplines. Retrieved from https://www.knaw.nl/en/topics/kwaliteit/quality-assessment-of-scientific-research
- Kreiman, G., & Maunsell, J. H. R. (2011). Nine Criteria for a Measure of Scientific Output. Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, 5. http://doi.org/10.3389/fncom.2011.00048
- Lowe, A. D., & Locke, J. (n.d.). Problematising the Construction of Journal Quality: An Engagement with the Mainstream. Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=308773
- Lowe, A., & Locke, J. (2005). Perceptions of journal quality and research paradigm: results of a web-based survey of British accounting academics. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 30(1), 81–98. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2004.05.002
- Mårtensson, P., Fors, U., Wallin, S.-B., Zander, U., & Nilsson, G. H. (2016). Evaluating research: A multidisciplinary approach to assessing research practice and quality. Research Policy, 45(3), 593–603. http://doi.org/10.1016/J.RESPOL.2015.11.009
- Nazim Ali, S., Young, H. C., & Ali, N. M. (1996). Determining the quality of publications and research for tenure or promotion decisions. Library Review, 45(1), 39–53. http://doi.org/10.1108/00242539610107749
- Research Information Network RIN. (2010). Quality assurance and assessment of scholarly research. Retrieved from: http://www.rin.ac.uk/system/files/attachments/Quality_Assurance_screen_0.pdf
- Saarela, M., Kärkkäinen, T., Lahtonen, T., & Rossi, T. (2016). Expert-based versus citation-based ranking of scholarly and scientific publication channels. Journal of Informetrics, 10(3), 693–718. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.03.004
- Smart, J. C. (1983). Perceived quality and citation rates of education journals. Research in Higher Education, 19(2), 175–182. http://doi.org/10.1007/BF00974757
- Sutherland, W. J., Goulson, D., Potts, S. G., & Dicks, L. V. (2011). Quantifying the Impact and Relevance of Scientific Research. PLoS ONE, 6(11), e27537. http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0027537
- Szklo, M. (2006). Quality of scientific articles. Revista de Saúde Pública, 40(spe), 30–35. http://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-89102006000400005
- The Royal Academy of Engineering. (2008). The Assessment of Research Quality in The Assessment of Research Quality in. Retrieved from https://www.raeng.org.uk/publications/reports/assessment_of_research
- Van De Sompel, H., Bollen, J., Hagberg, A., & Chute, R. (2009). A principal component analysis of 39 scientific impact measures. PloS One, 4(6), e6022. http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0006022
- Vereniging van Universiteiten VSNU, Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen KNAW, & Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek NWO. (2016). Standard Evaluation Protocol 2015 – 2021 — KNAW. Retrieved from https://www.knaw.nl/nl/actueel/publicaties/standard-evaluation-protocol-2015-2021
- n
Vereniging van Universiteiten VSNU, Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen KNAW, & Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek. (2015). Standard Evaluation Protocol 2009-2015. Retrieved from http://vsnu.nl/files/documenten/Domeinen/Onderzoek/SEP 2009-2015 archief.pdf
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
- scidecode continues to be scidecode, but scinoptica lives again - 9. Dezember 2022
- Update on the scidecode study on Persistent Identifiers (PIDs) - 22. Mai 2022
- Open Journal Systems (OJS) Installationen in Deutschland - 19. Mai 2022