Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ Anuario ThinkEPIarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
Anuario ThinkEPI
Article . 2022 . Peer-reviewed
Data sources: Crossref
Claim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Contra el pensamiento mágico de la bibliometría

descriptionPublicationkeyboard_double_arrow_right Article 13 Sep 2022Publisher:Ediciones Profesionales de la Informacion SLJournal:Anuario ThinkEPI, volume 16 (issn: 2564-8837, Copyright policy )
Authors: Nicolás Robinson-García;

doi: 10.3145/thinkepi.2022.e16a21

Contra el pensamiento mágico de la bibliometría

Abstract

En este texto se introduce el debate sobre el uso de aproximaciones cualitativas frente al uso de indicadores cuantitativos de cara a la evaluación de la actividad científica. Se argumenta que la discusión sobre los criterios o métodos de evaluación tiene un papel excesivamente predominante, relegando a un segundo plano la cuestión más esencial: el objetivo que persigue la evaluación y cómo se valoran las diferentes actividades que realizan los investigadores. Se concluye con algunos puntos relativos al sistema de evaluación español y los problemas de diseño que impiden avanzar en un sistema de evaluación contextualizado y responsable.

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    		 3
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    		 Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    		 Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    		 Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
3
Top 10%
Average
Average
gold