Do Universities or Research Institutions With a Specific Subject Profile Have an Advantage or a Disadvantage in Institutional Rankings? A Latent Class Analysis With Data From the SCImago Ranking

Using data compiled for the SCImago Institutions Ranking, we look at whether the subject area type an institution (university or research-focused institution) belongs to (in terms of the fields researched) has an influence on its ranking position. We used latent class analysis to categorize institutions based on their publications in certain subject areas. Even though this categorization does not relate directly to scientific performance, our results show that it exercises an important influence on the outcome of a performance measurement: Certain subject area types of institutions have an advantage in the ranking positions when compared with others. This advantage manifests itself not only when performance is measured with an indicator that is not field-normalized but also for indicators that are field-normalized.

[1]  Frank Ziegele,et al.  Multidimensional ranking : the design and development of u-multirank , 2012 .

[2]  L. Bornmann,et al.  The Usefulness of Peer Review for Selecting Manuscripts for Publication: A Utility Analysis Taking as an Example a High-Impact Journal , 2010, PloS one.

[3]  Jeroen K. Vermunt,et al.  6. The Simultaneous Decision(s) about the Number of Lower- and Higher-Level Classes in Multilevel Latent Class Analysis , 2010 .

[4]  Anthony F. J. van Raan,et al.  Universities Scale Like Cities , 2012, ArXiv.

[5]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior , 2008, J. Documentation.

[6]  Kuang-hua Chen,et al.  A comparative study on world university rankings: a bibliometric survey , 2012, Scientometrics.

[7]  Jung Cheol Shin,et al.  The Past, Present, and Future of University Rankings , 2011 .

[8]  Rüdiger Mutz,et al.  University and student segmentation: multilevel latent-class analysis of students' attitudes towards research methods and statistics. , 2013, The British journal of educational psychology.

[9]  Vicente P. Guerrero-Bote,et al.  A new approach to the metric of journals' scientific prestige: The SJR indicator , 2010, J. Informetrics.

[10]  David J. Sheskin,et al.  Handbook of Parametric and Nonparametric Statistical Procedures , 1997 .

[11]  Thed N. van Leeuwen,et al.  Benchmarking international scientific excellence: Are highly cited research papers an appropriate frame of reference? , 2002, Scientometrics.

[12]  Donald F. Westerheijden,et al.  An evaluation and critique of current rankings , 2012 .

[13]  Thed N. van Leeuwen,et al.  The Leiden ranking 2011/2012: Data collection, indicators, and interpretation , 2012, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[14]  Jacob Cohen.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[15]  Daniel Torres-Salinas,et al.  Mapping Academic Institutions According to Their Journal Publication Profile: Spanish Universities as a Case Study , 2012, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[16]  J. Vermunt,et al.  Latent Gold 4.0 User's Guide , 2005 .

[17]  V. Neuhaus,et al.  Latent Class Analysis , 2010 .

[18]  Peder Olesen Larsen,et al.  Publication, cooperation and productivity measures in scientific research , 2007, Scientometrics.

[19]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Do Scientific Advancements Lean on the Shoulders of Giants? A Bibliometric Investigation of the Ortega Hypothesis , 2010, PloS one.

[20]  Ulrich Teichler,et al.  University rankings : theoretical basis, methodology and impacts on global higher education , 2011 .

[21]  H. Bozdogan.  Choosing the Number of Component Clusters in the Mixture-Model Using a New Informational Complexity Criterion of the Inverse-Fisher Information Matrix , 1993 .

[22]  P. Lachenbruch.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.) , 1989 .

[23]  R. Mutz,et al.  Entwicklung eines Hochschul-Rankingverfahrens mittels Mixed-Rasch-Modell und Mehrebenenanalyse am Beispiel der Psychologie , 2007 .