What's in a Number? Issues in Providing Evidence of Impact and Quality of Research(ers)

Bibliographic Data

ID4705294
AuthorsJulianne Cheek (University of South Australia), Bridget Garnham, James Quan (University of South Australia)
Year2006
Volume16
Issue3
Pages423-435
Publication date2006-03-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueQualitative Health Research (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1049-7323 • E-ISSN: 1552-7557
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/1049732305285701
PMID16449691
OpenAlexW2140557408
LanguageEN
Citations received17
References cited12

One of the challenges facing qualitative researchers in a climate in which audit culture has permeated many facets of the institutions in which they research is how to establish the impact and quality of their research. When examining track records, granting institutions place significant emphasis on publication performance. Although the quality and impact of publications have traditionally been assessed by peer review, there is currently a global trend toward the development, refinement, and increased use of quantitative metrics, particularly citation analysis and journal impact factor. In this article, the authors share their experience of using the metrics citation analysis and journal impact factor in the preparation of an application for funding. Their aim is twofold: to raise awareness about potential issues in the practical application of these metrics; and to offer critique about and, they hope, "quality" to the writing and rhetoric concerning how to measure publication impact and quality

Audit · Business · Citation · Impact factor · Political science · Public relations · Doctoral Education Challenges and Solutions · Law · Meta-analysis and systematic reviews · Psychology · scientometrics and bibliometrics research · Accounting

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub