Posted on Leave a comment

New preprint out! Valuation regimes in academia

Check our latest preprint from a multiple case-study of five departments combining CV analysis and semi-structured interviews. Here is the preprint:

Robinson-Garcia, Nicolas, Rodrigo Costas, Tina Nane, and Thed N. van Leeuwen. 2021. Valuation regimes in academia: Researchers’ attitudes towards their diversity of activities and academic performance. SocArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/ve7d3.

Posted on Leave a comment

The unintended consequences of task specialization in research careers

DISCLAIMER: This is a blog post written originally for the Leiden Madtrics blog in which we summarize our findings in our most recent paper published in eLife. The original blog post can be accessed here.

Researchers collaborate specializing in specific tasks. However, the research evaluation system only rewards specific profiles of researchers, threatening the diversity  of the science ecosystem.

Continue reading The unintended consequences of task specialization in research careers
Posted on Leave a comment

Preprint out! Task specialization and its effects on research careers

Yesterday we made openly accessible our work on task specialization and its effects on research careers. The paper is available here doi:10.1101/2020.07.01.181669

Continue reading Preprint out! Task specialization and its effects on research careers
Posted on Leave a comment

Online seminar for the Academic Careers Hub at CWTS

Yesterday I had the privilege of presenting an online seminar for the Academic Careers Hub at CWTS, invited by Inge van der Weijden and Guus Dix. In this presentation I showed the latest updates on the valuation model we are designing and which we will soon be able to test with a multiple case study analysis on five departments of Dutch universities. Find below the presentation. Looking forward to be able to show more definite results!

Continue reading Online seminar for the Academic Careers Hub at CWTS
Posted on Leave a comment

A Humanities Ranking of Spanish universities based on experts’ opinion

As part of the MOOC Decision Making Under Uncertainty: Applying Structured Expert Judgment I had to conduct an actual elicitation with experts. Structured Expert Judgment is designed for and implemented in areas in which there is an evident lack of data and hence, we are forced to rely on experts to make predictions. This is not the case of scientometrics, where the volume of data is actually increasing exponentially with the transition to online collaboration, commenting and dissemination of scientific work.

Continue reading A Humanities Ranking of Spanish universities based on experts’ opinion
Posted on 1 Comment

Structured Expert Judgment

Quantifying uncertainty or trying to make predictions on subject for which there is an evident lack of data can be challenging. Hence turning into experts seems reasonable, given the consideration that these may not agree on their judgments. The Structured Experts Judgment Method or Cooke’s Method, named after Roger Cooke who formulated such methodology, aims at treating experts judgment as scientific data in a methodologically transparent way. Structured judgment method may pursue three goals according to Cooke & Gossens (2008):

Continue reading Structured Expert Judgment
Posted on Leave a comment

Presenting specialized profiles based on contribution statements

Last week the Knowledge Transfer Conference held in Córdoba (Spain) and organized by the IESA (CSIC), took place. We took this opportunity to present for the first time our results on the use of contribution statements to profile researchers combining Bayesian Networks and Archetypal Analysis. Bayesian Networks is a machine learning technique to develop predictive models. Archetypal Analysis is a non-parametric technique for identifying patterns in multivariate data sets. Instead of clustering cases, it defines archetypes where cases take extreme values in one or more of the variables introduced.

Continue reading Presenting specialized profiles based on contribution statements
Posted on Leave a comment

Valuation model presented at the #ATLC2019

Yesterday, Nicolas presented the paper ‘Towards a multidimensional valuation model of scientists’ at the Atlanta Conference on Science and Innovation Policy 2019 in Atlanta, GA. The model was previously presented as a poster at the ISSI 2019 Conference. In this case, we are now moving with the data collection process and have already retrieved the bibliometric data for the six research groups we are analyzing as case studies. As a kind of exploratory analysis to see if the model we have designed could actually identify different profiles, we did an archetypal analysis using very limited and dubious variables to operationalize each dimension. Although the results most be interpreted with lots of caution, the fact that we could find distinct archetypes and even some consistencies between fields, was really surprising and reassuring.

Continue reading Valuation model presented at the #ATLC2019
Posted on Leave a comment

The Falling Walls contest

Last week Nicolas participated in the Falling Walls Lab Marie-Sklodowska Curie contest in which MSCA fellows are faced with the challenge of presenting their research in just three minutes. After receiving some training and coaching on public speaking, 30 contestants had the pleasure of participating in this unusual event.

Continue reading The Falling Walls contest
Posted on 1 Comment

Presenting the valuation model at ISSI 2019 in Rome

Last Tuesday we presented the poster ‘Towards a multidimensional valuation model of scientists’ co-authored with Tina Nane, Rodrigo Costas and Thed N. van Leeuwen at the ISSI 2019 Conference held in Rome . Here we include a brief summary of its contents:

Continue reading Presenting the valuation model at ISSI 2019 in Rome