...">

Bibliometric Services for the Administration at the University of Vienna

  1. Bibliometric Profiles for Individual Evaluation
  2. Bibliometric Profiles for Faculty Evaluations
  3. Bibliometric Profiles for Professorial Appointment Procedures

Bibliometric Profiles for Individual Evaluation

Aim & Description:

Our bibliometric reports serve to supplement the self-assessment of a professor who is to be evaluated. It originates from a mutual agreement between the Department for Bibliometrics and Publication Strategies and the professor in question. After completion, the report is reviewed by the Unit for Quality Assurance and is the provided at the disposal of the Rector’s Office and the peers.

The process includes:

  • an initial interview with the professor who is to be evaluated,
  • a bibliometric analysis of the last ten years with the following aspects
    • coverage analyses
    • activity analyses
    • visibility analyses
    • impact analyses
    • analysis of the citing documents
    • cooperation analyses on different levels
    • focus and reference analyses, also including maps and other visualisation elements
    • optional: delineation of a hot topic and benchmarking with other leading scientists in the same research field
  • a final discussion of the results with the professor being evaluated
Target Group and Availability:

Professors who are, in accordance with their contracts, to be evaluated five years after their appointment as part of a quality assessment (or are to be evaluated in the context of an inspection of their credentials). The commission of a bibliometric report through the Rector’s Office is specific to each discipline.


General information about bibliometric profiles:
General Information about Bibliometric Profiles


Literature

Gorraiz, Juan et al. (2016). Individual Bibliometric Assessment @ University of Vienna: From Numbers to Multidimensional Profiles. Zenodo. 10.5281/zenodo.45402


For further information please contact
bibliometrie@univie.ac.at


Bibliometric Profiles for Faculty Evaluations

Aim & Description:

The performance agreements between the Rector’s Office and all faculties are respectively prepared by the Unit for Quality Assurance and serve as a basis for the bibliometric reports, which are to be created.

These reports are, in principle, similar to the individual evaluations (see individual evaluation) and they additionally distinguish themselves through their varying granularity (research emphasis, research group, department, etc.). They also include a results comparison, which is achieved through various data sources (u:cris, WoS, InCites, etc.).

It should be explicitly emphasised that bibliometric reports themselves do not constitute the results of an evaluation. Each bibliometric report created serves as a consultation paper and will initially be discussed and validated with the Dean responsible for the faculty being evaluated, before ultimately being made available to the Rector’s Office and selected peers in a revised and annotated version.

Target Group(s) and Availability:

Deans, Rector’s Office and Peers
The University of Vienna takes an “informed peer-review” approach to the periodic (at least every seven years) evaluation of faculties and centres (http://www.qs.univie.ac.at/evaluation-von-fakultaeten-und-zentren/ ).

For further information and assignments please contact
Unit for Quality Assurance  at the University of Vienna: michael.hofer@univie.ac.at; sara.john@univie.ac.at; evaluation@univie.ac.at


Bibliometric Profiles for Professorial Appointment Procedures

Aim & Description:

This service is provided for faculty administration in collaboration with our Unit for Quality Assurance . The applicants are bibliometrically analysed and the results gained are provided equally for both the Peers and the Appointments Committee (http://www.qs.univie.ac.at/berufungsverfahren/ ).

The selection of the standards, data sources and criteria (selection of the indicators) used, always takes place under mutual agreement, which provides the basis for the compilation of data. The retrieved publication output from all applicants who make the shortlist is subsequently analysed in comparison with the publication lists provided.

The generated reports’ most important element is a preference for simple rather than compound indicators, as well as the so-called "top counts approach". The latter approach meets the requirements of bibliometric analyses and considers both the different publication cultures and different strategical orientations in a flexible manner.

Our standard report comprises of the following parts:

  1. Introduction
  2. Activity analysis in compliance with the publication lists provided in comparison with the coverage in the data sources used (normally the Web of Science Core Collection)
  3. Bibliometric analysis of the last complete 10 years (including activity, visibility and impact analysis)
  4. Additional information ( shortened citation analysis of the whole career period, extent of the coverage in other data sources and internationalisation)
  5. Control data (research focus, analysis of authorships, percentage of self-citations, etc.)
  6. Timelines and trend lines of the publication output in the last complete 10 years
  7. Applicants network
  8. Comparison of the results gained with those from other data sources (normally Scopus and Google Scholar)
  9. Selected comments, which emphasise the most important bibliometric aspects and reveal significant discrepancies
  10. List of the indicators and abbreviations used
Target Group and Availability:

Professorial appointment committees

These bibliometric analyses can normally be carried out within two to four weeks, depending on the number of applicants to be analysed and the available staff resources. We politely request that clients bear this in mind and contact our department in good time.

For further information and commissions, please contact
irina.stumpf@univie.ac.at; michael.hofer@univie.ac.at; juan.gorraiz@univie.ac.at

Further literature:

Gorraiz, J & Gumpenberger, C (2015). A flexible bibliometric approach for the assessment of professorial appointments. Scientometrics, 105, Issue 3, pp 1699-1719;
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11192-015-1703-6 
DOI 10.1007/s11192-015-1703-6