Evaluation of research in context: an approach and two cases

Stefan de Jong; Pleun  van Arensbergen; Floortje Daemen; Barend  van der Meulen; Peter  van den Besselaar

doi:10.3152/095820211X12941371876346

Evaluation of research in context: an approach and two cases

Stefan de Jong, Pleun van Arensbergen, Floortje Daemen, Barend van der Meulen, Peter van den Besselaar

Governance and Pluralism

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

63 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Science is increasingly heterogeneous, posing new questions for research evaluation. How can we evaluate the between scientific and societal quality of research, taking into account differences between research fields and between research groups? In this paper we present the findings of two case studies in fields where societal and scholarly output of research are highly intertwined (architecture and law). We analyze the nature of the two fields in terms of research areas and specific aspects of knowledge dynamics. This results in an approach and indicators for contextual research evaluation.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	61-72
Journal	Research Evaluation
Volume	20
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.3152/095820211X12941371876346
Publication status	Published - Mar 2011

Bibliographical note

Acknowledgments
We acknowledge funding from the European Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement no. 230330, the SIAMPI project. We thank the ERiC Platform
and the ERiC and SIAMPI researchers for their contributions, especially Mark Pen, Jack Spaapen, Leonie van Drooge, and Frank Wamelink. We also thank the staff at the involved
universities and the stakeholders for their willingness to collaborate in this project. The comments of two anonymous reviewers were helpful for improving an earlier draft.
PvdB, SPLdJ and PvA contributed to the design of the study, data analysis and writing. All authors contributed to data collection.

Research programs

ESSB PA

Access to Document

10.3152/095820211X12941371876346

Cite this

@article{ed9bc80e29024833a5e3679ad1750a00,

title = "Evaluation of research in context: an approach and two cases",

abstract = "Science is increasingly heterogeneous, posing new questions for research evaluation. How can we evaluate the between scientific and societal quality of research, taking into account differences between research fields and between research groups? In this paper we present the findings of two case studies in fields where societal and scholarly output of research are highly intertwined (architecture and law). We analyze the nature of the two fields in terms of research areas and specific aspects of knowledge dynamics. This results in an approach and indicators for contextual research evaluation.",

author = "{de Jong}, Stefan and {van Arensbergen}, Pleun and Floortje Daemen and {van der Meulen}, Barend and {van den Besselaar}, Peter",

note = "Acknowledgments We acknowledge funding from the European Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement no. 230330, the SIAMPI project. We thank the ERiC Platform and the ERiC and SIAMPI researchers for their contributions, especially Mark Pen, Jack Spaapen, Leonie van Drooge, and Frank Wamelink. We also thank the staff at the involved universities and the stakeholders for their willingness to collaborate in this project. The comments of two anonymous reviewers were helpful for improving an earlier draft. PvdB, SPLdJ and PvA contributed to the design of the study, data analysis and writing. All authors contributed to data collection. ",

year = "2011",

month = mar,

doi = "10.3152/095820211X12941371876346",

language = "English",

volume = "20",

pages = "61--72",

journal = "Research Evaluation",

issn = "0958-2029",

publisher = "Oxford University Press",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of research in context

T2 - an approach and two cases

AU - de Jong, Stefan

AU - van Arensbergen, Pleun

AU - Daemen, Floortje

AU - van der Meulen, Barend

AU - van den Besselaar, Peter

N1 - Acknowledgments We acknowledge funding from the European Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement no. 230330, the SIAMPI project. We thank the ERiC Platform and the ERiC and SIAMPI researchers for their contributions, especially Mark Pen, Jack Spaapen, Leonie van Drooge, and Frank Wamelink. We also thank the staff at the involved universities and the stakeholders for their willingness to collaborate in this project. The comments of two anonymous reviewers were helpful for improving an earlier draft. PvdB, SPLdJ and PvA contributed to the design of the study, data analysis and writing. All authors contributed to data collection.

PY - 2011/3

Y1 - 2011/3

N2 - Science is increasingly heterogeneous, posing new questions for research evaluation. How can we evaluate the between scientific and societal quality of research, taking into account differences between research fields and between research groups? In this paper we present the findings of two case studies in fields where societal and scholarly output of research are highly intertwined (architecture and law). We analyze the nature of the two fields in terms of research areas and specific aspects of knowledge dynamics. This results in an approach and indicators for contextual research evaluation.

AB - Science is increasingly heterogeneous, posing new questions for research evaluation. How can we evaluate the between scientific and societal quality of research, taking into account differences between research fields and between research groups? In this paper we present the findings of two case studies in fields where societal and scholarly output of research are highly intertwined (architecture and law). We analyze the nature of the two fields in terms of research areas and specific aspects of knowledge dynamics. This results in an approach and indicators for contextual research evaluation.

U2 - 10.3152/095820211X12941371876346

DO - 10.3152/095820211X12941371876346

M3 - Article

SN - 0958-2029

VL - 20

SP - 61

EP - 72

JO - Research Evaluation

JF - Research Evaluation

IS - 1

ER -

Evaluation of research in context: an approach and two cases

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Research programs

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this