THE PROPERTY THAT IS FACTUALLY BEING EVALUATED WHEN THEY SAY THEY EVALUATE IMPACT

Introduction. Analysis of the definitions and perceptions of the notion of “impact”, introduced into circulation by Yu. Garfield in 1955, does not allow to assert that in the scientometrics literature there is a strict definition of this notion at all. Since it is assumed that citedness figures are...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: V. S. Lazarev
Format: Article
Language:Russian
Published: National Electronic Information Consortium (NEICON) 2019-06-01
Series:Наука и научная информация
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.neiconjournal.com/jour/article/view/43
_version_ 1797876607797428224
author V. S. Lazarev
author_facet V. S. Lazarev
author_sort V. S. Lazarev
collection DOAJ
description Introduction. Analysis of the definitions and perceptions of the notion of “impact”, introduced into circulation by Yu. Garfield in 1955, does not allow to assert that in the scientometrics literature there is a strict definition of this notion at all. Since it is assumed that citedness figures are its reliable indicator, it is necessary to discover what property is actually reflected by this indicator.Materials and methods. Analytical interpretation of the scientific literature related to this problem since 1955.Results. Comparison of the notion of “impact” with the possibilities of its quantitative evaluation by citedness figures demonstrated the unreliability of this basic scientometric method for the assessment of exactly “impact” as in terms of cause-and-effect relationships, “impact” may or may not be the reason for the use of scientific documents reflected in their citedness figures. In other words, citedness is not a very reliable proxy (substitute indicator) to be used for assessing poorly defined (as it was shown in my previous article published in Scholarly Research and Information; 2019;2(1):63–73) notion of “impact”. At the same time, citedness figures reflect the value of cited scientific documents (by reflecting their use while the creation of citing documents).Discussion and Conclusions. If “impact” should not be considered as a key notion of scientometrics, then its place can naturally be taken by the notion of the value of cited documents, their totalities, creators, etc.
first_indexed 2024-04-10T02:05:54Z
format Article
id doaj.art-fd4646965a814cc79512059506b0923d
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2658-3143
language Russian
last_indexed 2024-04-10T02:05:54Z
publishDate 2019-06-01
publisher National Electronic Information Consortium (NEICON)
record_format Article
series Наука и научная информация
spelling doaj.art-fd4646965a814cc79512059506b0923d2023-03-13T08:39:34ZrusNational Electronic Information Consortium (NEICON)Наука и научная информация2658-31432019-06-012212913810.24108/2658-3143-2019-2-2-129-13823THE PROPERTY THAT IS FACTUALLY BEING EVALUATED WHEN THEY SAY THEY EVALUATE IMPACTV. S. Lazarev0Научная библиотека Белорусского национального технического университетаIntroduction. Analysis of the definitions and perceptions of the notion of “impact”, introduced into circulation by Yu. Garfield in 1955, does not allow to assert that in the scientometrics literature there is a strict definition of this notion at all. Since it is assumed that citedness figures are its reliable indicator, it is necessary to discover what property is actually reflected by this indicator.Materials and methods. Analytical interpretation of the scientific literature related to this problem since 1955.Results. Comparison of the notion of “impact” with the possibilities of its quantitative evaluation by citedness figures demonstrated the unreliability of this basic scientometric method for the assessment of exactly “impact” as in terms of cause-and-effect relationships, “impact” may or may not be the reason for the use of scientific documents reflected in their citedness figures. In other words, citedness is not a very reliable proxy (substitute indicator) to be used for assessing poorly defined (as it was shown in my previous article published in Scholarly Research and Information; 2019;2(1):63–73) notion of “impact”. At the same time, citedness figures reflect the value of cited scientific documents (by reflecting their use while the creation of citing documents).Discussion and Conclusions. If “impact” should not be considered as a key notion of scientometrics, then its place can naturally be taken by the notion of the value of cited documents, their totalities, creators, etc.https://www.neiconjournal.com/jour/article/view/43impactвоздействиенаукометрияколичественная оценкацитируемостьиспользованиеценность
spellingShingle V. S. Lazarev
THE PROPERTY THAT IS FACTUALLY BEING EVALUATED WHEN THEY SAY THEY EVALUATE IMPACT
Наука и научная информация
impact
воздействие
наукометрия
количественная оценка
цитируемость
использование
ценность
title THE PROPERTY THAT IS FACTUALLY BEING EVALUATED WHEN THEY SAY THEY EVALUATE IMPACT
title_full THE PROPERTY THAT IS FACTUALLY BEING EVALUATED WHEN THEY SAY THEY EVALUATE IMPACT
title_fullStr THE PROPERTY THAT IS FACTUALLY BEING EVALUATED WHEN THEY SAY THEY EVALUATE IMPACT
title_full_unstemmed THE PROPERTY THAT IS FACTUALLY BEING EVALUATED WHEN THEY SAY THEY EVALUATE IMPACT
title_short THE PROPERTY THAT IS FACTUALLY BEING EVALUATED WHEN THEY SAY THEY EVALUATE IMPACT
title_sort property that is factually being evaluated when they say they evaluate impact
topic impact
воздействие
наукометрия
количественная оценка
цитируемость
использование
ценность
url https://www.neiconjournal.com/jour/article/view/43
work_keys_str_mv AT vslazarev thepropertythatisfactuallybeingevaluatedwhentheysaytheyevaluateimpact
AT vslazarev propertythatisfactuallybeingevaluatedwhentheysaytheyevaluateimpact