Abstract

Research assessment in the social sciences and humanities (SSH) is delicate. Assessment procedures meet strong criticisms from SSH scholars and bibliometric research shows that the methods that are usually applied are ill-adapted to SSH research. While until recently research on assessment in the SSH disciplines focused on the deficiencies of the current assessment methods, we present some European initiatives that take a bottom-up approach. They focus on research practices in SSH and reflect on how to assess SSH research with its own approaches instead of applying and adjusting the methods developed for and in the natural and life sciences. This is an important development because we can learn from previous evaluation exercises that whenever scholars felt that assessment procedures were imposed in a top-down manner without proper adjustments to SSH research, it resulted in boycotts or resistance. Applying adequate evaluation methods not only helps foster a better valorization of SSH research within the research community, among policymakers and colleagues from the natural sciences, but it will also help society to better understand SSH’s contributions to solving major societal challenges. Therefore, taking the time to encourage bottom-up evaluation initiatives should result in being able to better confront the main challenges facing modern society. This article is published as part of a collection on the future of research assessment.

Highlights

  • While there is more than a 100 years of scientific inquiry on research and dissemination practices in the natural and life sciences, until recently bibliometric and social studies on science and technology research neglected the sciences and humanities (SSH) (Hemlin, 1996)

  • There are methods for research assessment in the natural and life sciences that relate to the practices in these fields and are accepted by the community and the measurement properties are tested by bibliometric research

  • Knowledge on research and dissemination practices in the SSH is scarce, while research assessment did not stop at the gate of the SSH disciplines (Guillory, 2005; Burrows, 2012)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

While there is more than a 100 years of scientific inquiry on research and dissemination practices in the natural and life sciences, until recently bibliometric and social studies on science and technology research neglected the SSH (Hemlin, 1996). Research assessment procedures usually apply bibliometric and scientometric methods developed for the natural and life sciences that do not reflect SSH research and disseminations practices.

Objectives
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call