Author:
Jensenius Francesca R.,Htun Mala,Samuels David J.,Singer David A.,Lawrence Adria,Chwe Michael
Abstract
ABSTRACTGoogle Scholar (GS) is an important tool that faculty, administrators, and external reviewers use to evaluate the scholarly impact of candidates for jobs, tenure, and promotion. This article highlights both the benefits of GS—including the reliability and consistency of its citation counts and its platform for disseminating scholarship and facilitating networking—and its pitfalls. GS has biases because citation is a social and political process that disadvantages certain groups, including women, younger scholars, scholars in smaller research communities, and scholars opting for risky and innovative work. GS counts also reflect practices of strategic citation that exacerbate existing hierarchies and inequalities. As a result, it is imperative that political scientists incorporate other data sources, especially independent scholarly judgment, when making decisions that are crucial for careers. External reviewers have a unique obligation to offer a reasoned, rigorous, and qualitative assessment of a scholar’s contributions and therefore should not use GS.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Sociology and Political Science
Reference24 articles.
1. Reviewers are blinkered by bibliometrics
2. “The Modal Number of Citations to Political Science Articles Is Greater Than Zero: Accounting for Citations in Articles and Books.”;Samuels;PS: Political Science and Politics,2011
3. “Academia Isn’t Baseball.”;Nexon;Duck of Minerva,2015
4. “Google Scholar Metrics and Scholarly Productivity in International Relations.”;Hendrix;Duck of Minerva,2015
5. Where Is International Relations Going? Evidence from Graduate Training
Cited by
29 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献