Les Dérives de l'Évaluation de la Recherche: du bon usage de la bibliométrie (The Excesses of Research Evaluation: The Proper Use of Bibliometrics) - By Yves Gingras

Yves Gingras dénonce ici l’utilisation à contre-emploi des indicateurs bibliométriques dans l’évaluation de la recherche scientifique, en s’appuyant sur son dernier ouvrage « Les dérives de l’évaluation dans la recherche, du bon usage de la bibliométrie ». L’évaluation s’est en effet emparée d’indicateurs comme le nombre de publications scientifiques et les indices de citations (Science Citation Index) pour mesurer la productivité et la performance des chercheurs, des laboratoires ou des universités. En historien des sciences, Yves Gingras utilise les outils bibliométriques pour analyser la dynamique globale de la science ou les trajectoires particulières de disciplines scientifiques. L’informatisation des données bibliométriques permet, depuis 1970, de recenser une grande quantité d’informations dans de nombreux domaines de connaissances. Ces informations quantitatives, qui visaient initialement à gérer les collections de revues, rendent les orientations thématiques palpables ou révèlent l’ouverture de fronts de science. Elles permettent également des analyses plus sociologiques, comme l’illustre l’article récent d’Yves Gingras, mettant par exemple en évidence la persistance des disparités de genre dans la science (cf. bibliographie ci-après).

[1]  Rey-Rocha Jesús,et al.  Patterns of the foreign contributions in some domestic vs. international journals on Earth Sciences , 2004 .

[2]  A. Raan,et al.  A bibliometric analysis of six economics research groups: A comparison with peer review , 1993 .

[3]  Michael J. Moravcsik,et al.  Variation of the nature of citation measures with journals and scientific specialties , 1978, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[4]  Thierry Marchant,et al.  An axiomatic characterization of the ranking based on the h-index and some other bibliometric rankings of authors , 2009, Scientometrics.

[5]  Peter Taylor,et al.  Citation Statistics , 2009, ArXiv.

[6]  Michel Zitt,et al.  Correcting glasses help fair comparisons in international science landscape: Country indicators as a function of ISI database delineation , 2003, Scientometrics.

[7]  Carl T. Bergstrom,et al.  Differences in impact factor across fields and over time , 2009 .

[8]  Judit Bar-Ilan,et al.  Which h-index? — A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar , 2008, Scientometrics.

[9]  Domingo Docampo,et al.  On using the Shanghai ranking to assess the research performance of university systems , 2010, Scientometrics.

[10]  Antonio Quesada,et al.  Monotonicity and the Hirsch index , 2009, J. Informetrics.

[11]  Jerome K. Vanclay,et al.  Impact factor: outdated artefact or stepping-stone to journal certification? , 2011, Scientometrics.

[12]  Jonathan Adams,et al.  Profiling citation impact: A new methodology , 2007, Scientometrics.

[13]  M. Carl Drott,et al.  The aging of Scientific literature: a citation Analysis , 1979, J. Documentation.

[14]  G. Gilbert.  Referencing as Persuasion , 1977 .

[15]  L. Egghe,et al.  Theory and practise of the g-index , 2006, Scientometrics.

[16]  Thed N. van Leeuwen,et al.  Language biases in the coverage of the Science Citation Index and its consequencesfor international comparisons of national research performance , 2001, Scientometrics.

[17]  Tibor Braun,et al.  World Flash on Basic Research , 2005, Scientometrics.

[18]  Henk F. Moed,et al.  Opinion paper: thoughts and facts on bibliometric indicators , 2012, Scientometrics.

[19]  Per Ottar Seglen,et al.  The skewness of science , 1992 .

[20]  Claudio Castellano,et al.  Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[21]  Jonas Lundberg,et al.  Lifting the crown - citation z-score , 2007, J. Informetrics.

[22]  Michel Zitt,et al.  Relativity of citation performance and excellence measures: From cross-field to cross-scale effects of field-normalisation , 2005, Scientometrics.

[23]  E. Garfield.  The history and meaning of the journal impact factor. , 2006, JAMA.

[24]  H. Small,et al.  Modifying the journal impact factor by fractional citation weighting: The audience factor , 2008 .

[25]  Jean-Charles Billaut,et al.  Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking? , 2010, Scientometrics.

[26]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  Scientific peer review , 2011, Annu. Rev. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[27]  Y. Gingras,et al.  Cities and the geographical deconcentration of scientific activity: A multilevel analysis of publications (1987–2007) , 2014 .

[28]  Irene Wormell,et al.  Informetric analysis of the international impact of scientific journals: how "international" are the international journals? , 1998, J. Documentation.

[29]  Thed N. van Leeuwen,et al.  Towards a new crown indicator: Some theoretical considerations , 2010, J. Informetrics.

[30]  Linda Butler,et al.  Extending citation analysis to non-source items , 2006, Scientometrics.

[31]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Caveats for the journal and field normalizations in the CWTS ("Leiden") evaluations of research performance , 2010, J. Informetrics.

[32]  Henk F. Moed,et al.  The future of research evaluation rests with an intelligent combination of advanced metrics and transparent peer review , 2007 .

[33]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  How to analyze percentile citation impact data meaningfully in bibliometrics: The statistical analysis of distributions, percentile rank classes, and top-cited papers , 2013, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[34]  Ludo Waltman,et al.  The inconsistency of the h-index , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[35]  Gabriel Pinski,et al.  Citation influence for journal aggregates of scientific publications: Theory, with application to the literature of physics , 1976, Inf. Process. Manag..

[36]  Grant Lewison.  From biomedical research to health improvement , 2004, Scientometrics.

[37]  Catherine Dehon,et al.  Uncovering excellence in academic rankings: a closer look at the Shanghai ranking , 2009, Scientometrics.

[38]  Anthony F. J. van Raan,et al.  Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods , 2005, Scientometrics.

[39]  Henk F. Moed,et al.  Improving the accuracy of Institute for Scientific Information's journal impact factors , 1995 .

[40]  Gerhard J. Woeginger,et al.  An axiomatic characterization of the Hirsch-index , 2008, Math. Soc. Sci..

[41]  C. Dejours.  L'évaluation du travail à l'épreuve du réel , 2003 .