Rectifying an honest error in world university rankings
A Solution to the Problem of Indicator Weight Discrepancies
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4545540 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Kaycheng Soh (0000-0002-4379-2955, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2013 |
| Volume | 35 |
| Issue | 6 |
| Pages | 574-585 |
| Publication date | 2013-12-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1360-080X • E-ISSN: 1469-9508 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/1360080x.2013.844670 |
| OpenAlex | W1963941720 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
| References cited | 3 |
Discrepancies between the nominal and attained indicator weights misinform rank consumers as to the relative importance of the indicators. This may lead to unwarranted institutional judgements and misdirected actions, causing resources being wasted unnecessarily. As a follow-up to two earlier studies, data from the Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), Quacquarelli Symonds World University Ranking (QSWUR) and Times Higher Education World University Rankings (THEWUR) for the top 100 universities were re-analysed. Discrepancies have again been found in the three ranking results, and the problem was rectified by applying score standardisation via T-scaling. The universities were then ranked on the new T-score, which accurately reflect the systems’ indicator weights. Implications for future use of ranking results and refinement of the ranking procedure are discussed
Econometrics · Higher education · Information retrieval · Political science · Rank (graph theory · Ranking (information retrieval · Statistics · Computer Science · Higher Education Governance and Development · Law · Mathematics · Psychology
| Unique citing works | 3 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,27 |
| Citation span | 2015 - 2017 (3) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 3 |