Objektivnost ali arbitrarnost?

o možnostih in težavah standardizacije kvantitativnih kazalcev v slovenskem družboslovju

Slavko Splichal (Author), Franc Mali (Author)

Abstract

Članek obravnava problem kvantificiranja kot socialne tehnologije, ki ima v znanosti za cilj standardizacijo (skupin) ljudi, organizacijo (znanstvenega) diskurza in enotnost znanstvene skupnosti. Značilen primer je raziskovanje znanstvene ustvarjalnosti in uspešnosti, še zlasti bibliometrično ocenjevanje kakovosti, pomembnosti in vpliva objavljenih znanstvenih del, ki po eni strani zadeva raziskovalce same, po drugi strani pa financerje oz. odločevalce. V preštevanju publicističnih enot v znanosti ni mogoče nedvoumno ločevati znanstvene aktivnosti, kakovosti, produktivnosti in napredka. Pri uporabi bibliometričnih metod se pogosto zanemarjajo razlike med posameznimi znanstvenimi področji ali pa sploh ni jasno določeno, kaj z njimi želimo meriti. Primeri sistemov bibliomteričnega ocenjevanja, ki se uveljavljajo v Sloveniji kot tipičnem primeru "majhne znanstvene skupnosti" (zaradi jezikovne ekskluzivnosti) pa vendarle kažejo, da je kvantificiranje kljub vsem pomislekom lahko neprimerno manj arbitrarno in pristransko kot subjektivno izvedensko ocenjevanje.

Keywords

bibliometrija;znanstvena politika;znanstveno delo;objektivnost;vrednotenje;bibliografije;publiciranje;

Data

Language:	Slovenian
Year of publishing:	1999
Typology:	1.01 - Original Scientific Article
Organization:	UL FDV - Faculty of Social Sciences
Publisher:	Fakulteta za sociologijo, politične vede in novinarstvo v Ljubljani
UDC:	001.8
COBISS:	19455581
ISSN:	0040-3598
Parent publication:	Teorija in praksa
Views:	1174
Downloads:	243
Average score:	0 (0 votes)
Metadata:

Other data

Secondary language:	Unknown
Secondary title:	Objectivity or arbitrarines?
Secondary abstract:	The article addresses the problem of quantification as a social technology that in science aims at the standardization of (groups of) people, organization of (scientific) discourse, and unity of the scientific community. A typical case is the investigation of scientific creativity and efficiency, particularly bibliometric assessment of quality, importance, and impact of scientific publications, which on the one hand concerns researchers and, on the other hand, financial subsidizers and decision makers. In enumerating bibliographic units, scientific activity, quality, productivity, and progress are not clearly distinguished. In the application of bibliometric methods, differences between specific scientific fields are often ignored or it is not clearly stated, what is the actual aim of research. Yet examples of bibliometric assessment in Slovenia, a typical "small scientific community" due to its linguistic exclusiveness, show that, despite all doubts,quantification is much less arbitrary and partial than subjective expert assessment.
Secondary keywords:	bibliometrics;science policy;scientific work;objectivity;evaluation;bibliography;publishing;
URN:	URN:NBN:SI
Type (COBISS):	Not categorized
Pages:	str. 893-911
Volume:	ǂLet. ǂ36
Issue:	ǂšt. ǂ6
Chronology:	nov./dec. 1999
Keywords (UDC):	science and knowledge;organization;computer science;information;documentation;librarianship;institutions;publications;znanost in znanje;organizacije;informacije;dokumentacija;bibliotekarstvo;institucije;publikacije;prolegomena;fundamentals of knowledge and culture;propaedeutics;prolegomena;splošne osnove znanosti in kulture;science and knowledge in general;organization of intellectual work;znanost in znanje na splošno;organizacija intelektualnega dela;methodology;znanstvena metodologija;
ID:	36394