Arts and Humanities and the others: Why can’t we measure arts and humanities
Taşkın Zehra, Doğan Güleda
ITM Web of Conferences · 2020
doi:10.1051/itmconf/20203302003 (opens in a new tab)
We email you when a new notice or a question about this paper appears.
Abstract
The use of numbers (publications and citations) to evaluate research/er performances are widespread since ease of use. However, disciplinary differences must be considered to evaluate research/ers accurately without misjudgments in tenures and incentives. The most different filed from others in terms of publications and citation patterns is Arts & Humanities. The main aim of this study is to reveal the main differences between Arts & Humanities and the other fields by considering publications, citations, and collaboration. For this aim, the main statistics for 59,728,700 papers published between 1980-2018 are gathered from InCites in terms of the 251 Web of Science subject categories. The data confirmed that Arts & Humanities is considerably different from other fields. We showed the degree of these differences using statistical measures. The huge difference found out that underline the indispensability for evaluating Arts & Humanities separately from the others.
Abstract licence: CC BY
References1
1 more reference, whose wording the paper’s licence keeps private.
Reads
Read by people on this page
None yet.
Checked or read by AI through naulon
None yet.
A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.
Are you an author?
Is this your paper?
Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.