Home
TRE SCIENZIATI AUTOREVOLI GIUDICANO IL METODO VALUTATIVO BIBLIOMETRICO ITALIANO PDF Stampa E-mail

Sul metodo valutativo bibliometrico ecco i commenti di tre autorevoli biologi, membri dell'Accademia Nazionale delle Scienze USA. Franklin Stahl, professore emerito all'Università di Eugene, Oregon: "In brief, it is a nightmarish system. There is no perfect way of judging, but this is about the worst I have seen." Mary-Lou Pardue, professore emerito al Massachusetts Institute of Technology: "It seems to me that this system is so artificial that it should appeal only to those who do not know enough about the science to make judgements based on real value". Daniel L. Hartl, professore emerito all'Harvard University: "Anyone who claims to have developed a methodology for evaluation of research based on a journal's impact factor or a researcher's number of citations, supposedly "objective" and "certifiable" criteria, has an invalid concept of how science really works and what impact one's research actually has on the field". (Fonte: P. Dimitri, Roars 12-10-17)