• Home

The mismeasurement of science

Rate this item
(0 votes)

The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) points out that using the Journal Impact Factor as a proxy measure for the value or quality of specific research and individual scientists leads to biased research assessment. How can we resist misusing metrics?

Full Citation

Lawrence, P. A. (2007). The mismeasurement of science. Current Biology17(15), R583-R585



Answer from the hero in Leo Szilard's 1948 story “The Mark Gable Foundation” when asked by a wealthy entrepreneur who believes that science has progressed too quickly, what he should do to retard this progress: “You could set up a foundation with an annual endowment of thirty million dollars. Research workers in need of funds could apply for grants, if they could make a convincing case. Have ten committees, each composed of twelve scientists, appointed to pass on these applications. Take the most active scientists out of the laboratory and make them members of these committees. …First of all, the best scientists would be removed from their laboratories and kept busy on committees passing on applications for funds. Secondly, the scientific workers in need of funds would concentrate on problems which were considered promising and were pretty certain to lead to publishable results. …By going after the obvious, pretty soon science would dry out. Science would become something like a parlor game. …There would be fashions. Those who followed the fashions would get grants. Those who wouldn't.”





Additional Info

  • I am a: Young scholar
  • Domain: Impact Assessment
  • Type of resource: Papers
Read 212 times
Unless otherwise indicated, content hosted on OpenUP Hub is licensed under an Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).