| Title |
Too much noise in the Times Higher Education rankings
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientometrics, February 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11192-010-0189-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fred L. Bookstein, Horst Seidler, Martin Fieder, Georg Winckler |
| Abstract |
Several individual indicators from the Times Higher Education Survey (THES) data base-the overall score, the reported staff-to-student ratio, and the peer ratings-demonstrate unacceptably high fluctuation from year to year. The inappropriateness of the summary tabulations for assessing the majority of the "top 200" universities would be apparent purely for reason of this obvious statistical instability regardless of other grounds of criticism. There are far too many anomalies in the change scores of the various indices for them to be of use in the course of university management. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 3 | 4% |
| Ireland | 2 | 2% |
| Australia | 2 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| Iran, Islamic Republic of | 1 | 1% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Croatia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 73 | 86% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 21 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 11% |
| Librarian | 7 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 20 | 24% |
| Unknown | 10 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 33 | 39% |
| Computer Science | 13 | 15% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 8 | 9% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 5 | 6% |
| Engineering | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 13% |
| Unknown | 11 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,611,911
of 22,712,476 outputs
Outputs from Scientometrics
#322
of 2,667 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,003
of 166,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientometrics
#4
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,712,476 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,667 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 166,016 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.