Abstract

In the social sciences it is largely impossible to substantiate statements about research excellence with reliable indicators for international benchmarking of fields and institutions. Governments that must decide how to use taxpayer money to support social science research would like statements of research excellence intended to influence distribution of resources to be backed by evidence widely considered to be objective. Even social scientists who accept this premise are often extremely uncomfortable with emerging evaluation systems. In this essay, I accept the value of evaluation. However, I reject the idea that sociological research should be distorted until it fits into an evaluation system of convenience. Currently, systems can be established without due regard for the nature of the scholarship they are evaluating. Thus incentives can be established that will likely change scholarship in potentially damaging ways. I argue that the nature of sociological and other social science research needs to be understood and respected and then evaluation systems designed that do not distort scholarly research. My argument is based on a review of studies examining social science publishing, particularly in comparison to publishing in the sciences.

How to Cite:

Hicks, D., (2010) “De gevaren van partiële bibliometrische evaluatie in de sociale wetenschappen”, Tijdschrift voor Sociologie 31(1), 6–22. doi: https://doi.org/10.21825/sociologos.86746