TY - JOUR
KW - Academic values and beliefs
KW - Bibliometric assessment
KW - Bibliometric evaluation criteria
KW - Gender disparities
KW - Merit criteria
KW - Preferences
KW - Research evaluation
KW - Tenure and promotion
KW - Value Judgment
AU - Laura Cruz-Castro
AU - Luis Sanz-Menendez
AB - Criteria for assessing candidates are essential elements for the functioning of evaluation practices in academia. This article addresses a relevant issue of academia: the preference for evaluation criteria for tenure and promotion, as reported by female and male academics employed at Spanish universities. We use survey data from 4,460 faculty members, testing whether there are differences in the evaluation criteria that women and men prefer and exploring the factors that account for such preferences. Our focus is on bibliometric evaluation criteria. We propose an analytical model that considers the influence of career and quality factors, values about universalism and the mission of universities, and beliefs about meritocracy in the context of the academic evaluation system. We use a binary logistic model to explain the preference for bibliometric criteria and develop the comparisons by gender using predicted probabilities and marginal effects for estimating the difference. We find that female academics do not have the same preferences as men and report lower preferences for bibliometrics. However, women at the highest research quality levels have similar probabilities than males to prefer bibliometric criteria for evaluation.
BT - Journal of Informetrics
DA - 2021-08-01
DO - 10.1016/j.joi.2021.101196
IS - 3
N2 - Criteria for assessing candidates are essential elements for the functioning of evaluation practices in academia. This article addresses a relevant issue of academia: the preference for evaluation criteria for tenure and promotion, as reported by female and male academics employed at Spanish universities. We use survey data from 4,460 faculty members, testing whether there are differences in the evaluation criteria that women and men prefer and exploring the factors that account for such preferences. Our focus is on bibliometric evaluation criteria. We propose an analytical model that considers the influence of career and quality factors, values about universalism and the mission of universities, and beliefs about meritocracy in the context of the academic evaluation system. We use a binary logistic model to explain the preference for bibliometric criteria and develop the comparisons by gender using predicted probabilities and marginal effects for estimating the difference. We find that female academics do not have the same preferences as men and report lower preferences for bibliometrics. However, women at the highest research quality levels have similar probabilities than males to prefer bibliometric criteria for evaluation.
PY - 2021
EP - 101196
ST - What should be rewarded?
T2 - Journal of Informetrics
TI - What should be rewarded? Gender and evaluation criteria for tenure and promotion
UR - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157721000675
VL - 15
Y2 - 2024-08-27
SN - 1751-1577
ER -