How arbitrary are the weights assigned to books in performance-based research funding? An empirical assessment of the weight and size of monographs in Flanders
| Published date | 19 November 2018 |
| Date | 19 November 2018 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-05-2018-0110 |
| Pages | 660-672 |
| Author | Frederik T. Verleysen,Tim C.E. Engels |
| Subject Matter | Library & information science,Information behaviour & retrieval,Information & knowledge management,Information management & governance,Information management |
How arbitrary are the weights
assigned to books in
performance-based research
funding? An empirical
assessment of the weight
and size of monographs
in Flanders
Frederik T. Verleysen
Department of Research Affairs and Innovation,
University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium, and
Tim C.E. Engels
Department of Research Affairs and Innovation,
and Expertise Center for R&D Monitoring (ECOOM), Faculty of Social Sciences,
University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to present an empirical assessment of the weight assigned to
monographs in the publication indicator of the performance-based research funding system (PRFS) in
Flanders, Belgium. By relating publication weight to publication size the authors offer an alternative
perspective on the production of scholars who publish monographs. This perspective on weights is linked to
the aggregation level at which PRFS indicators are used: the national/regional one as opposed to the local one.
In Flanders as elsewhere the publication indicator designed for funding distribution between universities has
sometimes trickled down to institutions, their faculties and departments.
Design/methodology/approach –As an alternative indicator of scholarly production the authors
propose the median num ber of pages of a publicat ion type. Measuring the size of publications a llows to
compare the weight ratio between monographs and journal arti cles in the publication indicator to their size
ratio in the VABB-SHW da tabase. The authors c ompare two levels, one o f four universities an d one
of 16 disciplines.
Findings –Median publication size differences between disciplines are much larger than those between
universities. This indicates that an increase of monographs’weight in the publication indicator would hardly
affect funding distribution at the regional level. Disciplines with a relatively large share of monographs,
however, would contribute more to the publication indicator. Hence an increase of monographs’weight might
provide a better balance between fields and between publication types.
Originality/value –This paper presents a thought experiment regarding the weight assigned to different
publication types in the publication indicator of the Flemish PRFS: what would happen if this weight were
replaced by the median number of pages of a publication type? In doing so, we highlight that such weighting
schemes play an important role in finding a balance between fields of research. The sizeable differences
between weight and size ratios offer a new and critical perspective on the weighting schemes currently used
in PRFS, also in other countries.
Keywords Social sciences and humanities, Monograph, Performance-based research funding model,
Publication size, Publication type weights, VABB-SHW
Paper type Research paper
Aslib Journal of Information
Management
Vol. 70 No. 6, 2018
pp. 660-672
© Emerald PublishingLimited
2050-3806
DOI 10.1108/AJIM-05-2018-0110
Received 18 May 2018
Revised 10 September 2018
19 September 2018
Accepted 2 October 2018
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/2050-3806.htm
The authors would like to thank the Flemish Government for the funding provided to the Flemish
Center for R&D Monitoring (ECOOM). The authors also thank Ronald Rousseau, Emanuel Kulczycki
and two anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful feedback and input on drafts of this manuscript.
660
AJIM
70,6
To continue reading
Request your trial