Are more and better indicators the solution

Summary We discuss Starbuck's proposal to improve decision processes in scholarly evaluation. While we agree that more variety is needed in evaluation committees, we suggest to enlist scholars from other research fields rather than people from outside academia. We disagree with the proposal that more and better indicators of research effectiveness will improve research. We argue that this even would lead to worse results than what is observed today. Attention would be deviated from the content of research, and intrinsic motivation, which is essential for good research, would be crowded out. We propose that evaluations that are based on indicators need to be pushed back. After a careful selection process, researchers need to be given the opportunity to pursue the research they consider to be fruitful.

[1]  Donald Gillies.  How Should Research Be Organised , 2008 .

[2]  R. Posner.  From the new institutional economics to organization economics: with applications to corporate governance, government agencies, and legal institutions , 2010, Journal of Institutional Economics.

[3]  Bruno S. Frey,et al.  Publishing as Prostitution? – Choosing Between One's Own Ideas and Academic Success , 2003 .

[4]  R. Monastersky.  The number that's devouring science , 2005 .

[5]  M. Polanyi.  The Republic of science , 1962 .

[6]  M. Polanyi.  The Republic of Science: Its Political and Economic Theory , 1962 .

[7]  P. David,et al.  Toward a new economics of science , 1994 .

[8]  I. Janis.  Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes , 1982 .

[9]  R. Merton,et al.  The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. , 1976 .

[10]  R. Merton,et al.  The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations.@@@Einstein and the Generations of Science. , 1976 .

[11]  Norman Kaplan,et al.  The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations , 1974 .

[12]  L. Butler,et al.  Explaining Australia’s increased share of ISI publications—the effects of a funding formula based on publication counts , 2003 .

[13]  Frederic S. Lee.  The Research Assessment Exercise, the state and the dominance of mainstream economics in British universities , 2006 .

[14]  R. Merton,et al.  The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations , 1975, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion.

[15]  Paul R. Milgrom,et al.  Multitask Principal–Agent Analyses: Incentive Contracts, Asset Ownership, and Job Design , 1991 .

[16]  William H. Starbuck,et al.  The Constant Causes of Never-Ending Faddishness in the Behavioral and Social Sciences , 2009 .

[17]  William H. Starbuck,et al.  How Much Better are the Most Prestigious Journals? The Statistics of Academic Publication , 2005, Organ. Sci..

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

[19]  B. Frey.  Not Just for the Money , 1997 .

[20]  J. Tirole,et al.  Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation , 2003 .