Find in Library

This article discusses the performance indicators for the evaluation of humanities and social sciences (H&SS) researchers. First, this article discusses the use and the problems of peer review methods in evaluating H&SS research and argues that bibliometric methods are both an objective and appropriate methodology for the evaluation. Second, it reviews and compares existing research evaluation indicators and discusses the characteristics of H&SS research which an ideal set of indicators should address, in particular, the diverse publication types in H&SS research output. The authors argue for the need to assign different weightings to different types of publications in order to counterbalance the bias embedded in previous bibliometric measures which assumes all publications are of equal importance. Likewise, it argues that journal ranking can be used to differentiate journals of different levels of importance for each specific field in order to correct the previously flawed assumption that all journals are equally important. This article concludes that H&SS research evaluation requires indicators different from natural science research evaluation and that, although H&SS research often focuses on regional issues, indicators can be designed to encourage the internationalization of the local H&SS research in order to enhance its global visibility and impact. (Article content in Chinese with English abstract)