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

Wagner, U 2016, 'The Publishing Game: The dubious mission of evaluating research and measuring performance in a cross-disciplinary research field', Scandinavian Sport Studies Forum, vol. 7, pp. 63-88. <https://sportstudies.org/2016/05/18/the-publishing-game-the-dubious-mission-of-evaluating-research-and-measuring-performance-in-a-cross-disciplinary-field/>

APA

Wagner, U. (2016). The Publishing Game: The dubious mission of evaluating research and measuring performance in a cross-disciplinary research field. Scandinavian Sport Studies Forum, 7, 63-88. https://sportstudies.org/2016/05/18/the-publishing-game-the-dubious-mission-of-evaluating-research-and-measuring-performance-in-a-cross-disciplinary-field/

Vancouver

Wagner U. The Publishing Game: The dubious mission of evaluating research and measuring performance in a cross-disciplinary research field. Scandinavian Sport Studies Forum. 2016;7:63-88.

Author

Wagner, Ulrik. / The Publishing Game: The dubious mission of evaluating research and measuring performance in a cross-disciplinary research field. In: Scandinavian Sport Studies Forum. 2016 ; Vol. 7. pp. 63-88.

Bibtex

@article{f149367f10b242fca48ff2d05fee43fd,
title = "The Publishing Game: The dubious mission of evaluating research and measuring performance in a cross-disciplinary research field",
abstract = "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{\textquoteright}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.",
keywords = "Faculty of Science, Scholarly publishing, Scholarly journals, Peer review standards, Bibliometric research indicator, Performance management, Sport sciences, Case study, Critical realism, Publish or perish",
author = "Ulrik Wagner",
note = "(Ekstern)",
year = "2016",
language = "English",
volume = "7",
pages = "63--88",
journal = "Scandinavian Sport Studies Forum",
issn = "2000-088X",
publisher = "Malm{\"o} University",

}

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