Avaliação bibliométrica de indivíduos

Artigo muito interessante que apresenta uma crítica aos índices de avaliação bibliométrica de indivíduos. Vale a pena ler e refletir.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/epn/2009704

Para quem tem preguiça de ler, mas ao menos gosta de refletir, posto aqui as conclusões do artigo:

"This leads us to the following conclusions about these indices for evaluation of an individual:

They have not been rationally tested with sufficient

care, in comparison with other methods of evaluation. Paradoxically, the methods for evaluating research have escaped the scientific selection that is applied in all disciplines! Even elementary consistency checks as those mentioned above (e.g. effect of dividing by the number of authors) have not been performed; no one really understand the influence of the arbitrary method of calculation on the final result. 

No one seems to have had the time to honestly try to obtain indices that are more closely related to the quality and long-term relevance of science.

They are “not even wrong” since they undoubtedly do contain some information on individuals, mostly when this information is trivial and already known. When the indices are used in real life in a homogeneous population, they give more information on other variables than the quality of the work, such as the style of work of the evaluated person.

Their success is not related to the quality of the information they provide, but more on the facility: a saving of the time necessary to make a real evaluation.

Finally, it seems that the faith in these indices is not very different from something that escapes rationality. One could compare this with astrology and numerology, which pretend to be scientific but have never gone through the process of scientific selection."