The Publishing Game: The dubious mission of evaluating research and measuring performance in a cross-disciplinary research field
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
The Publishing Game: The dubious mission of evaluating research and measuring performance in a cross-disciplinary research field. / Wagner, Ulrik.
In: Scandinavian Sport Studies Forum, Vol. 7, 2016, p. 63-88.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - The Publishing Game: The dubious mission of evaluating research and measuring performance in a cross-disciplinary research field
AU - Wagner, Ulrik
N1 - (Ekstern)
PY - 2016
Y1 - 2016
N2 - Sport is a cross-disciplinary research field in which, similar to other fields, the axiom publish or perish dominates. Despite differences in scientific publishing cultures, researchers of a cross-disciplinary spectrum like sport science are often subjected to a single performance measurement regime. By using Denmark as a case, this paper critically examines how scientific contributions are validated and evaluated, and subsequently how academic performance is measured and ranked in a cross-disciplinary research field. Drawing on critical realism, the claim is that the interplay between national performance indicators, multiple stakeholders and certain journals’editorial practices within the sport sciencesundermines peer reviewing as our core procedure to ensure high academic quality standards. By emphasizing the fight for research autonomy and rather than rejecting peer reviewing per se, proposals for an extended reviewing practice and quality criteria that goes beyond ranking systems are suggested.
AB - Sport is a cross-disciplinary research field in which, similar to other fields, the axiom publish or perish dominates. Despite differences in scientific publishing cultures, researchers of a cross-disciplinary spectrum like sport science are often subjected to a single performance measurement regime. By using Denmark as a case, this paper critically examines how scientific contributions are validated and evaluated, and subsequently how academic performance is measured and ranked in a cross-disciplinary research field. Drawing on critical realism, the claim is that the interplay between national performance indicators, multiple stakeholders and certain journals’editorial practices within the sport sciencesundermines peer reviewing as our core procedure to ensure high academic quality standards. By emphasizing the fight for research autonomy and rather than rejecting peer reviewing per se, proposals for an extended reviewing practice and quality criteria that goes beyond ranking systems are suggested.
KW - Faculty of Science
KW - Scholarly publishing
KW - Scholarly journals
KW - Peer review standards
KW - Bibliometric research indicator
KW - Performance management
KW - Sport sciences
KW - Case study
KW - Critical realism
KW - Publish or perish
M3 - Journal article
VL - 7
SP - 63
EP - 88
JO - Scandinavian Sport Studies Forum
JF - Scandinavian Sport Studies Forum
SN - 2000-088X
ER -
ID: 257758106