Evaluating research institutions: the potential of the success-index

Research Topic Specialization of Universities in Information Science and Library Science and Its Impact on Inter-University Collaboration

Universities significantly empower the development of science and technology, and inter-university research collaborations have been one of the major approaches. Considering each university has its expertise regarding research topics in a given discipline, the present paper examines the specialization of university research and its impact on inter-university collaborations. Based on a keyword network constructed via research articles in Information Science and Library Science, 10 research topics are identified. Accordingly, the research topic diversity of a university and the research topic similarity between two universities are quantified. The universities with diverse research topics are found to be more collaborative. A further collaboration network analysis based on the Quadradic Assignment Procedure reveals the important role of research topic similarity on the closeness and impact of collaborations. The different research topic specializations largely prevent close collaborations between two universities, but on the other hand, have the potential to form a complementary combination of knowledge leading to more impactful research output. The analysis and results highlight the important role of research topic specialization and provide insights for the university- or department-level strategy for research collaborations.

On the quality evaluation of scientific entities in Poland supported by consistency-driven pairwise comparisons method

Comparison, rating, and ranking of alternative solutions, in case of multicriteria evaluations, have been an eternal focus of operations research and optimization theory. There exist numerous approaches at practical solving the multicriteria ranking problem. The recent focus of interest in this domain was the event of parametric evaluation of research entities in Poland. The principal methodology was based on pairwise comparisons. For each single comparison, four criteria have been used. One of the controversial points of the assumed approach was that the weights of these criteria were arbitrary. The main focus of this study is to put forward a theoretically justified way of extracting weights from the opinions of domain experts. Theoretical bases for the whole procedure are based on a survey and its experimental results. Discussion and comparison of the two resulting sets of weights and the computed inconsistency indicator are discussed.