The BOF-key is the performance-based research funding system that is used in Flanders, Belgium. In this paper we describe the historical background of the system, its current design and organization, as well as its ef...The BOF-key is the performance-based research funding system that is used in Flanders, Belgium. In this paper we describe the historical background of the system, its current design and organization, as well as its effects on the Flemish higher education landscape. The BOFkey in its current form relies on three bibliometric parameters: publications in Web of Science, citations in Web of Science, and publications in a comprehensive regional database for SSH publications. Taken together, the BOF-key forms a unique variant of the Norwegian model: while the system to a large extent relies on a commercial database, it avoids the problem of inadequate coverage of the SSH. Because the bibliometric parameters of the BOF-key are reused in other funding allocation schemes, their overall importance to the Flemish universities is substantial.展开更多
Purpose: This study expands on the results of a stakeholder-driven research project on quality indicators and output assessment of art and design research in Flanders-the Northern, Dutchspeaking region of Belgium. Her...Purpose: This study expands on the results of a stakeholder-driven research project on quality indicators and output assessment of art and design research in Flanders-the Northern, Dutchspeaking region of Belgium. Herein, it emphasizes the value of arts & design output registration as a modality to articulate the disciplinary demarcations of art and design research.Design/methodology/approach: The particularity of art and design research in Flanders is first analyzed and compared to international examples. Hereafter, the results of the stakeholderdriven project on the creation of indicators for arts & design research output assessment are discussed. Findings: The findings accentuate the importance of allowing an assessment culture to emerge from practitioners themselves, instead of imposing ill-suited methods borrowed from established scientific evaluation models(Biggs & Karlsson, 2011)-notwithstanding the practical difficulties it generates. They point to the potential of stakeholder-driven approaches for artistic research, which benefits from constructing a shared metadiscourse among its practitioners regarding the continuities and discontinuities between "artistic" and "traditional" research, and the communal goals and values that guide its knowledge production(Biggs & Karlsson, 2011;Hellstr?m, 2010;Ysebaert & Martens, 2018). Research limitation: The central limitation of the study is that it focuses exclusively on the "Architecture & Design" panel of the project, and does not account for intra-disciplinary complexities in output assessment. Practical implications: The goal of the research project is to create a robust assessment system for arts & design research in Flanders, which may later guide similar international projects. Originality/value: This study is currently the only one to consider the productive potential of(collaborative) PRFSs for artistic research.展开更多
Purpose： One of the main indicators of scientific production is the number of papers published in scholarly journals. Turkey ranks 18th place in the world based on the number of scholarly publications. The objective ...Purpose： One of the main indicators of scientific production is the number of papers published in scholarly journals. Turkey ranks 18th place in the world based on the number of scholarly publications. The objective of this paper is to find out if the monetary support program initiated in 1993 by the Turkish Scientific and Technological Research Council （TUBITAK） to incentivize researchers and increase the number, impact, and quality of international publications has been effective in doing so.Design/methodology/approach： We analyzed some 390,000 publications with Turkish affiliations listed in the Web of Science （WoS） database between 1976 and 2015 along with about 157,000 supported ones between 1997 and 2015. We used the interrupted time series （ITS） analysis technique （also known as ＂quasi-experimental time series analysis＂ or ＂intervention analysis＂） to test if TOBITAK＇s support program helped increase the number of publications. We defined ARIMA （1,1,0） model for ITS data and observed the impact of TOBiTAK＇s support program in 1994, 1997, and 2003 （after one, four and 10 years of its start, respectively）. The majority of publications （93%） were full papers （articles）, which were used as the experimental group while other types of contributions functioned as the control group. We also carried out a multiple regression analysis.Findings： TUBITAK＇s support program has had negligible effect on the increase of the number of papers with Turkish affiliations. Yet, the number of other types of contributions continued to increase even though they were not well supported, suggesting that TUBITAK＇s support program is probably not the main factor causing the increase in the number of papers with Turkish affiliations. Research limitations： Interrupted time series analysis shows if the ＂intervention＂ has had any significant effect on the dependent variable but it does not explain what caused the increase in the number of papers if it was not the intervention. Moreover, except the＂intervention＂, other ＂event（s）＂ that might affect the time series data （e.g., increase in the number of research personnel over the years） should not occur during the period of analysis, a prerequisite that is beyond the control of the researcher. Practical implications： TUBITAK＇s ＂cash-for-publication＂ program did not seem to have direct impact on the increase of the number of papers published by Turkish authors, suggesting that small amounts of payments are not much of an incentive for authors to publish more. It might perhaps be a better strategy to concentrate limited resources on a few high impact projects rather than to disperse them to thousands of authors as ＂micropayments.＂ Originality/value： Based on 25 years＇ worth of payments data, this is perhaps one of the first large-scale studies showing that ＂cash-for-publication＂ policies or ＂piece rates＂ paid to researchers tend to have little or no effect on the increase of researchers＇ productivity. The main finding of this paper has some implications for countries wherein publication subsidies are used as an incentive to increase the number and quality of papers published in international journals. They should be prepared to consider reviewing their existing support programs （based usually on bibliometric measures such as journal impact factors） and revising their reward policies.展开更多
文摘The BOF-key is the performance-based research funding system that is used in Flanders, Belgium. In this paper we describe the historical background of the system, its current design and organization, as well as its effects on the Flemish higher education landscape. The BOFkey in its current form relies on three bibliometric parameters: publications in Web of Science, citations in Web of Science, and publications in a comprehensive regional database for SSH publications. Taken together, the BOF-key forms a unique variant of the Norwegian model: while the system to a large extent relies on a commercial database, it avoids the problem of inadequate coverage of the SSH. Because the bibliometric parameters of the BOF-key are reused in other funding allocation schemes, their overall importance to the Flemish universities is substantial.
文摘Purpose: This study expands on the results of a stakeholder-driven research project on quality indicators and output assessment of art and design research in Flanders-the Northern, Dutchspeaking region of Belgium. Herein, it emphasizes the value of arts & design output registration as a modality to articulate the disciplinary demarcations of art and design research.Design/methodology/approach: The particularity of art and design research in Flanders is first analyzed and compared to international examples. Hereafter, the results of the stakeholderdriven project on the creation of indicators for arts & design research output assessment are discussed. Findings: The findings accentuate the importance of allowing an assessment culture to emerge from practitioners themselves, instead of imposing ill-suited methods borrowed from established scientific evaluation models(Biggs & Karlsson, 2011)-notwithstanding the practical difficulties it generates. They point to the potential of stakeholder-driven approaches for artistic research, which benefits from constructing a shared metadiscourse among its practitioners regarding the continuities and discontinuities between "artistic" and "traditional" research, and the communal goals and values that guide its knowledge production(Biggs & Karlsson, 2011;Hellstr?m, 2010;Ysebaert & Martens, 2018). Research limitation: The central limitation of the study is that it focuses exclusively on the "Architecture & Design" panel of the project, and does not account for intra-disciplinary complexities in output assessment. Practical implications: The goal of the research project is to create a robust assessment system for arts & design research in Flanders, which may later guide similar international projects. Originality/value: This study is currently the only one to consider the productive potential of(collaborative) PRFSs for artistic research.
文摘Purpose： One of the main indicators of scientific production is the number of papers published in scholarly journals. Turkey ranks 18th place in the world based on the number of scholarly publications. The objective of this paper is to find out if the monetary support program initiated in 1993 by the Turkish Scientific and Technological Research Council （TUBITAK） to incentivize researchers and increase the number, impact, and quality of international publications has been effective in doing so.Design/methodology/approach： We analyzed some 390,000 publications with Turkish affiliations listed in the Web of Science （WoS） database between 1976 and 2015 along with about 157,000 supported ones between 1997 and 2015. We used the interrupted time series （ITS） analysis technique （also known as ＂quasi-experimental time series analysis＂ or ＂intervention analysis＂） to test if TOBITAK＇s support program helped increase the number of publications. We defined ARIMA （1,1,0） model for ITS data and observed the impact of TOBiTAK＇s support program in 1994, 1997, and 2003 （after one, four and 10 years of its start, respectively）. The majority of publications （93%） were full papers （articles）, which were used as the experimental group while other types of contributions functioned as the control group. We also carried out a multiple regression analysis.Findings： TUBITAK＇s support program has had negligible effect on the increase of the number of papers with Turkish affiliations. Yet, the number of other types of contributions continued to increase even though they were not well supported, suggesting that TUBITAK＇s support program is probably not the main factor causing the increase in the number of papers with Turkish affiliations. Research limitations： Interrupted time series analysis shows if the ＂intervention＂ has had any significant effect on the dependent variable but it does not explain what caused the increase in the number of papers if it was not the intervention. Moreover, except the＂intervention＂, other ＂event（s）＂ that might affect the time series data （e.g., increase in the number of research personnel over the years） should not occur during the period of analysis, a prerequisite that is beyond the control of the researcher. Practical implications： TUBITAK＇s ＂cash-for-publication＂ program did not seem to have direct impact on the increase of the number of papers published by Turkish authors, suggesting that small amounts of payments are not much of an incentive for authors to publish more. It might perhaps be a better strategy to concentrate limited resources on a few high impact projects rather than to disperse them to thousands of authors as ＂micropayments.＂ Originality/value： Based on 25 years＇ worth of payments data, this is perhaps one of the first large-scale studies showing that ＂cash-for-publication＂ policies or ＂piece rates＂ paid to researchers tend to have little or no effect on the increase of researchers＇ productivity. The main finding of this paper has some implications for countries wherein publication subsidies are used as an incentive to increase the number and quality of papers published in international journals. They should be prepared to consider reviewing their existing support programs （based usually on bibliometric measures such as journal impact factors） and revising their reward policies.
