Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Taking Comfort in Points: The Appeal of the Norwegian Model in Sweden Cover

Taking Comfort in Points: The Appeal of the Norwegian Model in Sweden

Open Access
|Dec 2018

References

  1. Aagaard, K. (2015). How incentives trickle down: Local use of a national bibliometric indicator system. Science and Public Policy, 42(5), 725–737.
  2. Aagaard, K., Bloch, C., & Schneider, J. W. (2015). Impacts of performance-based research funding systems: The case of the Norwegian Publication Indicator. Research Evaluation, 24(2), 106–117.
  3. Ahlgren, P., Colliander, C., & Persson, O. (2012). Field normalized citation rates, field normalized journal impact and Norwegian weights for allocation of university research funds. Scientometrics, 92(3), 767–780.
  4. Dahler-Larsen, P. (2011). The evaluation society. Stanford University Press.
  5. Edlund, P., & Wedlin, L. (2017). Den kom flygande genom fönstret. Införandet av ett mätsystem för resursfördelning till forskning. In Wedlin, L. & Pallas, H. Det ostyrda universitetet: Perspektiv på styrning, autonomi och reform av svenska lärosäten, (pp. 216–243). Makadam Förlag: Göteborg
  6. Espeland, W. N., & Sauder, M. (2016). Engines of anxiety: Academic rankings, reputation, and accountability. Russell Sage Foundation.
  7. Haddow, G., & Hammarfelt, B. (to appear). Quality, impact and quantification: Indicators and metrics use by social scientists. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology.
  8. Hammarfelt, B., & de Rijcke, S. (2015). Accountability in context: Effects of research evaluation systems on publication practices, disciplinary norms, and individual working routines in the faculty of Arts at Uppsala University. Research Evaluation, 24(1), 63–77.
  9. Hammarfelt, B., & Haddow, G. (2018). Conflicting measures and values: How humanities scholars in Australia and Sweden use and react to bibliometric indicators. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 69(7), 924-935.
  10. Hammarfelt, B., Nelhans, G., Eklund, P., & Åström, F. (2016). The heterogeneous landscape of bibliometric indicators: Evaluating models for allocating resources at Swedish universities. Research Evaluation, 25(3), 292–305.
  11. MLE on Performance-based Funding of Public Research Organisations. European Commission. (2018). Retrieved August 24, 2018, from/en/policy-support-facility/mle-performance-based-funding-systems.
  12. Power, M. (1997). The audit society: Rituals of verification. OUP Oxford.
  13. Schneider, J. W. (2009). An Outline of the Bibliometric Indicator Used for Performance-Based Funding of Research Institutions in Norway. European Political Science, 8(3), 364–378.
  14. Sivertsen, G. (2016). Publication-based funding: The norwegian model. In M. Ochsner, S. E. Hug, & H. D. Daniel (Eds.), Research Assessment in the Humanities (pp. 79–90). Springer International Publishing.
  15. Sivertsen, G. (2018). The Norwegian Model in Norway. Journal of Data and Information Science, 3(4), 1–17.
  16. Waltman, L. (2017). Special section on performance-based research funding systems. Journal of Informetrics, 11(3), 904. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.05.015
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2018-0023 | Journal eISSN: 2543-683X | Journal ISSN: 2096-157X
Language: English
Page range: 85 - 95
Submitted on: Sep 7, 2018
|
Accepted on: Oct 25, 2018
|
Published on: Dec 7, 2018
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

© 2018 Björn Hammarfelt, published by Chinese Academy of Sciences, National Science Library
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.