Ring fenced research: the case of computer-assisted learning in health sciences

Interdisciplinary research is being promoted in many quarters as the way forward, but “research islands” still persist. Taking computer-assisted learning (CAL) within health sciences as a case in point, this paper describes a detailed study of the references to source material within papers published in general medical, specific nursing and general information and communications technology journals as pointing to papers published either in the same category of journal or journals of other categories. The results show that research within this area exhibits a disquieting inbred approach. Furthermore, there is clear evidence of a tendency amongst the papers examined to cite research published in journals with broadly the same impact factors as the journal in which the papers themselves are published. A discussion of the value of journal impact factors, which are a crude but useful index of the quality of journal, and their possible effect on the future of research in CAL within health sciences is embedded in the paper.

[1]  Kenneth E. Winker.  Criminal justice/criminology journal rankings: ASC versus ACJS , 1983 .

[2]  Chun-Yen Chang,et al.  A problem-solving based computer-assisted tutorial for the earth sciences , 2001, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[3]  Jeremy B. Fox,et al.  A multi-method evaluation of journals in the decision and management sciences by US academics , 2000 .

[4]  R. Thomson,et al.  Decision analysis in evidence-based decision making. , 2000, Journal of evaluation in clinical practice.

[5]  P. Sönksen,et al.  Computer assisted learning is an effective way of teaching endocrinology , 2001, Clinical endocrinology.

[6]  K. Sorocco,et al.  Ethnicity and clinical psychology: a content analysis of the literature. , 2002, Clinical psychology review.

[7]  Elaine Simpson Rn,et al.  Critical thinking in nursing education: literature review. , 2002 .

[8]  Arnold Reisman,et al.  Research Strategies Used by OR/MS Workers as Shown by an Analysis of Papers in Flagship Journals , 1995, Oper. Res..

[9]  Maurice Pendlebury,et al.  Measuring research quality: peer review 1, citation indices 0 , 2000 .

[10]  Maurice Pendlebury,et al.  Judging the quality of research in business schools: A comment from accounting , 1996 .

[11]  Donald S. Siegel,et al.  A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis of Journal Rankings: The Case of Formal Lists , 2000 .

[12]  Michael John Jones,et al.  Journal evaluation methodologies: A balanced response , 1996 .

[13]  Andrew M. Colman,et al.  A bibliometric evaluation of the research performance of British university politics departments: Publications in leading journals , 2005, Scientometrics.

[14]  M. Jones,et al.  Critically evaluating an applications vs theory framework for research quality , 1999 .

[15]  Richard J. Ormerod,et al.  An observation on publication habits based on the analysis of MS/OR journals , 1997 .

[16]  Gyula Vastag,et al.  Journal characteristics, rankings and social acculturation in operations management , 2002 .

[17]  George Hassapis,et al.  Assessment of the Reading Skill Improvement in the Computer-Assisted Teaching of a Foreign Language , 2001, Education and Information Technologies.

[18]  Margaret Denny,et al.  The use of computer assisted technology to enhance student psychiatric nurses learning during a practice placement. , 2003, Nurse education in practice.