.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
Return
Ranking Games
.png){kind=icon}
PRE
AI
DOI：10.1177/0193841X14524957.png)
.png){kind=icon}
Original request for help.png){kind=icon}
Share.png){kind=icon}
Save
Abstract
En 中文
Background: Research rankings based on bibliometrics today dominate governance in academia and determine careers in universities. Method: Analytical approach to capture the incentives by users of rankings and by suppliers of rankings, both on an individual and an aggregate level. Result: Rankings may produce unintended negative side effects. In particular, rankings substitute the taste for science by a taste for publication. We show that the usefulness of rankings rests on several important assumptions challenged by recent research. Conclusion: We suggest as alternatives careful socialization and selection of scholars, supplemented by periodic self-evaluations and awards. The aim is to encourage controversial discourses in order to contribute meaningful to the advancement of science.
Keywords:
academic governance
rankings
motivation
selection
socialization
AI Summary
Key information extracted from the uploaded paper, including a brief overview, abstract, background, key highlights, visual analysis, and future outlook.