British Academy Report on Peer Review and Metrics

[Stevan Harnad]

On Tue, 4 Sep 2007, Eliezer Geisler wrote:

> Dear Steven:
>
> In your latest Sigmetrics entry on the British response to Peer Review,
> you left out my book on metrics and an article I wrote sometime ago in The
> Scientist. It seems to me that all the discussion since then is rehashing
> established concepts and analyses. We know the system is flawed, but,
> as Winston Churchill once said in a different context about Democracy
> and our own Mark Twain about getting old: the alternatives are worse.
>
> E. Geisler (2000) The Metrics of Science and Technology, Greenwood Press.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Elie
>
> Elie Geisler
> Distinguished Professor of Management
>   and Director,
> IIT Center for the Management
> of Medical Technology (CMMT)
> Stuart School of Business
> Illinois Institute of Technology
> 565 West Adams Street
> Chicago, Illinois 60661
> Tel:(312)906-6532 Fax:(312)906-6549
> http://www.stuart.iit.edu

Dear Elie,

Thanks for your note. The list I gave was not meant to be exhaustive
(in fact it only referred to my own writings on this topic!), but I am
happy to post the reference to your book, and your New Scientist
Article too:

     Geisler, E. (2001) The Mires of Evaluation.
     The Scientist. 15(10) 39.

I would also like to add Henk Moed's book on the topic:

     Moed, H. F. (2005) Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation. NY
     Springer.

and his paper on download and citation metrics:

     Moed, H. F. (2005) Statistical Relationships Between Downloads
     and Citations at the Level of Individual Documents Within a Single
     Journal, Journal of the American Society for Information Science
     and Technology, 56(10): 1088-1097

Best wishes,

Stevan Harnad