Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
ZENODOarrow_drop_down
ZENODO
Dataset . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
ZENODO
Dataset . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
ZENODO
Dataset . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
ZENODO
Dataset . 2026
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
versions View all 4 versions
addClaim

Data for: Divergent Institutional Logics of Quantification in Research Evaluation

Authors: Zhang, Qian; Yue, Na; Liu, Zhiyuan;

Data for: Divergent Institutional Logics of Quantification in Research Evaluation

Abstract

This dataset contains the institutional texts, coded data, and analysis codeused in the study: “Divergent Institutional Logics of Quantification in Research Evaluation:Evidence from RPT Policies in Chinese and U.S. Research Universities”. The dataset consists of four components: (1) Original RPT policy documents from 100 research-intensive universities,including 50 institutions in China and 50 institutions in the United States.These documents include formal review, promotion, and tenure (RPT) policies,faculty appointment rules, and performance evaluation guidelines collectedfrom official university websites. (2) A consolidated coded dataset (Excel/CSV) summarizing institutional designfeatures for all 100 universities. The table includes the following variables: ID, Country, University, Authority Structure, Degree of Delegation,Outcome-based Threshold, Process-based Threshold, Performance Conversion,Peer Benchmarking. Each row represents one university. Binary indicators (“Yes/No”) and ordinalscales are used to capture how quantification is institutionally embeddedwithin RPT regimes across the two national contexts. (3) A Python script for statistical analysis and figure generation: “analysis_and_visualization_RPT_quantification.py”. This script reproduces the descriptive statistics, group comparisons, andfigures reported in the article. All coding was conducted from the original policy texts. The dataset andaccompanying analysis code are intended to support transparency,replicability, and comparative research on research evaluation,quantification, and higher education governance.

  • 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).
    0
    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.
    Average
    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!
0
Average
Average
Average