The Leiden Manifesto and Research Assessment

&
Science and Engineering Ethics 25 (2):643-644 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Evaluation of scientific research is essential to judge the impact of research and the author. In this regard, a newly devised Leiden Manifesto describes 10 principles for guiding research evaluation. The principles need to be analyzed critically and adapted as a preferred method of research evaluation.

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1007/s11948-017-0012-2

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,846

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

Challenges in studying the effects of scientific societies on research integrity.Felice J. Levine & Joyce M. Iutcovich - 2003 - Science and Engineering Ethics 9 (2):257-268.
On the Evaluation of Research in the Humanities, Particularly in Philosophy.Diego Marconi - 2012 - Iride: Filosofia e Discussione Pubblica 25 (3):451-474.
The Evaluation Scale: Exploring Decisions About Societal Impact in Peer Review Panels.Gemma E. Derrick & Gabrielle N. Samuel - 2016 - Minerva 54 (1):75-97.
Manifesto for a postcolonial international business and management studies: A provocation.R. I. Westwood & G. Jack - 2007 - .
La prise en compte de l’expertise dans les évaluations conduites par l’AERES.Didier Houssin - 2012 - Hermès: La Revue Cognition, communication, politique 64 (3):, [ p.].
Use and misuse of metrics in research evaluation.Ronald N. Kostoff - 1997 - Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (2):109-120.
Scientific societies and research integrity: What are they doing and how well are they doing it?Margot Iverson, Mark S. Frankel & Sanyin Siang - 2003 - Science and Engineering Ethics 9 (2):141-158.
Core Competitiveness of University Scientific Research and Its Evaluation.Shou-hua Zhang, Cheng-yi Hou & Juan-ru Wang - 2005 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 35 (3):129-131.
Efficiency – Model for Scientific Research Evaluation.Panaite Nica & Silviu Mihail Tita - 2013 - Revista Romaneasca pentru Educatie Multidimensionala 5 (1):141-159.
The principles and practices of Peer review.Ronald N. Kostoff - 1997 - Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1):19-34.
Plagiarism in Student Research: Responsibility of the Supervisors and Suggestions to Ensure Plagiarism Free Research.Kewal Krishan, Tanuj Kanchan, Neha Baryah & Richa Mukhra - 2017 - Science and Engineering Ethics 23 (4):1243-1246.
Scholarly communication development as a modernization basis for the research performance assessment and evaluation.Mikhail Kogalovsky, Ivan Nevolin & Sergei Parinov - 2017 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 51 (1):188-205.
Understanding risks and benefits in research on reproductive genetic technologies.Janet Malek - 2007 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 32 (4):339 – 358.
Publication ethics and the research assessment exercise: reflections on the troubled question of authorship.A. Sheikh - 2000 - Journal of Medical Ethics 26 (6):422-426.
A nursing manifesto: An emancipatory call for knowledge development, conscience, and praxis.Paula N. Kagan, Marlaine C. Smith, I. I. I. Cowling & Peggy L. Chinn - 2010 - Nursing Philosophy 11 (1):67-84.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-12-21

Downloads
13 (#1,035,489)

6 months
7 (#428,584)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references