Minerva 53 (2):117-139 (2015)

The range and types of performance metrics has recently proliferated in academic settings, with bibliometric indicators being particularly visible examples. One field that has traditionally been hospitable towards such indicators is biomedicine. Here the relative merits of bibliometrics are widely discussed, with debates often portraying them as heroes or villains. Despite a plethora of controversies, one of the most widely used indicators in this field is said to be the Journal Impact Factor. In this article we argue that much of the current debates around researchers’ uses of the JIF in biomedicine can be classed as ‘folk theories’: explanatory accounts told among a community that seldom get systematically checked. Such accounts rarely disclose how knowledge production itself becomes more-or-less consolidated around the JIF. Using ethnographic materials from different research sites in Dutch University Medical Centers, this article sheds new empirical and theoretical light on how performance metrics variously shape biomedical research on the ‘shop floor.’ Our detailed analysis underscores a need for further research into the constitutive effects of evaluative metrics
Keywords Journal Impact Factor  Biomedicine  Performance indicators  Bibliometrics  Research evaluation
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11024-015-9274-5
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,379
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Audit Society: Rituals of Verification.Michael Power - 1999 - British Journal of Educational Studies 47 (1):92-94.

View all 12 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

View all 14 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Use and Misuse of Metrics in Research Evaluation.Ronald N. Kostoff - 1997 - Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (2):109-120.
The Disaster of the Impact Factor.Khaled Moustafa - 2015 - Science and Engineering Ethics 21 (1):139-142.
The Scientometric Bubble Considered Harmful.Gonzalo Génova, Hernán Astudillo & Anabel Fraga - 2016 - Science and Engineering Ethics 22 (1):227-235.


Added to PP index

Total views
23 ( #495,364 of 2,519,663 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #406,756 of 2,519,663 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes