Click here to download

Research evaluation and bibliometrics: reflections from a business economics perspective
Author/s: Marco Giuliani, Stefano Marasca 
Year:  2015 Issue: Language: Italian 
Pages:  19 Pg. 133-151 FullText PDF:  103 KB
DOI:  10.3280/MACO2015-001006
(DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation:  clicca qui   and here 

In dependence of the lack of resources and the consequent need to manage better the allocation process, there is a growing interest regarding the issue of research evaluation. In particular, it is possible to notice a more frequent use of bibliometrics and citation-based indexes (impact factor, h-index, eigenfactor, etc.). The aim of this paper is to analyse to what extent citation-based indexes can be used to evaluate the research in business economics. In order to achieve the above-mentioned aim, the paper proposes a review of the main indexes analyzing their pros and cons and then it tries to draw some critical conclusions with reference to the citation behavior and to the used data base. In the last section, the paper proposes some reflections regarding the use of citation-based indexes for evaluating the research in business economics.
Keywords: Research assessment, research impact, bibliometric analysis, impact factor, quality of research
Jel Code: M00, M10, M40, M41

  1. Agliati M. (1990), La misurazione economica nella gestione d’impresa, Milano, Egea.
  2. Andriessen D.G. (2004), IC valuation and measurement: classifying the state of the art, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 5, 2, pp. 230-242., DOI: 10.1108/14691930410533669
  3. Baccini A. (2013), Come e perché ridisegnare la valutazione, Il Mulino, 1, pp. 80-87., DOI: 10.1402/44138
  4. Batista P.D., Campiteli M.G., Kinouchi O. (2006), Is it possible to compare researchers with different scientific interests?, Scientometrics, 68, 1, pp. 179-189., DOI: 10.1007/s11192-006-0090-4
  5. Biolcati-Rinaldi F. (2010), Quali indicatori bibliometrici per le scienze sociali, disponibile su: (accesso del 10 febbraio 2015).
  6. Bollen J., Rodriguez M.A., Van de Sompel H. (2007), MESUR: usage-based metrics of scholarly impact, paper presentato a 7th ACM/IEEE-CS joint conference on Digital libraries, Vancouver, disponibile su: (accesso del 10 febbraio 2015).
  7. Bollen J., Van de Sompel H (2008), Usage impact factor: the effects of sample characteristics on usage‐based impact metrics, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology, 59, 1, pp. 136-149., DOI: 10.1002/asi.20746
  8. Bollen J., Van de Sompel H., Rodriguez M.A. (2008), Towards usage-based impact metrics: first results from the mesur project, paper presentato a 8th ACM/IEEE-CS joint conference on Digital libraries, disponibile su: (accesso del 10 febbraio 2015)., DOI: 10.1145/1378889.1378928
  9. Bornmann L., Daniel H.D. (2005), Does the h-index for ranking of scientists really work?, Scientometrics, 65, 3, pp. 391-392., DOI: 10.1007/s11192-005-0281-4
  10. Bornmann L., Daniel H.D. (2008), What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior, Journal of Documentation, 64, 1, pp. 45-80., DOI: 10.1108/00220410810844150
  11. Cassella M., Bozzarelli O. (2011), Nuovi scenari per la valutazione della ricerca tra indicatori bibliometrici citazionali e metriche alternative nel contesto digitale, Biblioteche oggi, 29, 2, pp. 66-78.
  12. Cole J., Cole S. (1971), Measuring the Quality of Sociological Research: Problems in the Use of the “Science Citation Index”, The American Sociologist, 6, 1, pp. 23-29.
  13. De Robbio A. (2007), Analisi citazionale e indicatori bibliometrici nel modello Open Access, Bollettino AIB, 47, 3, pp. 257-288.
  14. Figà Talamanca A. (2000), L’Impact Factor nella valutazione della ricerca e nello sviluppo dell’editoria scientifica, Intervento al IV Seminario SINM, disponibile su:, (accesso del 10 febbraio 2015).
  15. Galassi G. (1974), Misurazioni differenziali, misurazioni globali e decisioni d’azienda, Milano, Giuffrè.
  16. Garfield E. (1965), Can citation indexing be automated?, in Stevens M.E., Giuliano V.E., Helprin L.B. editors, Statistical association methods for mechanized documentation. Symposium proceedings Washington 1964, Washington, National Bureau of Standards Miscellaneous Publication 269.
  17. Garfield E. (1972), Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation, Science, 178, pp. 471-479.
  18. Giuliani M. (2006), La misurazione del capitale intellettuale: utilità e limiti, Revisione contabile, 68, pp. 19-31.
  19. Greco G. (2014), Una comparazione internazionale tra i sistemi di valutazione della ricerca scientifica, Management Control, 1, pp. 87-99., DOI: 10.3280/MACO2014-001006
  20. Harzing A.W., Van der Wal R. (2007), Google Scholar: the democratization of citation analysis, Ethics in science and environmental politics, 8, 1, pp. 61-73.
  21. Hirsch J.E. (2005), An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output, Proceedings of the National academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102, 46, pp. 16569-16572., DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0507655102
  22. Marchi L., Marasca S., Giuliani M. (2013), Valutare la ricerca nella prospettiva europea e internazionale: prime riflessioni, Management Control, 3, pp. 77-98., DOI: 10.3280/MACO2013-003006
  23. Martin B.R. (1996), The use of multiple indicators in the assessment of basic research, Scientometrics, 36, 3, pp. 343-362., DOI: 10.1007/BF02129599
  24. Mazza G. (1997), Problemi di assiologia aziendale, Milano, Giuffrè.
  25. Moed H.F. (2006), Citation analysis in research evaluation, Dordrecht, Springer Science & Business Media.
  26. Moed H.F., Burger W., Frankfort J., Van Raan A.F. (1985), The application of bibliometric indicators: important field-and time-dependent factors to be considered, Scientometrics, 8, 3-4, pp. 177-203., DOI: 10.1007/BF02016935
  27. Moed H.F., Garfield E. (2004), In basic science the percentage of “authoritative” references decreases as bibliographies become shorter, Scientometrics, 60, 3, pp. 295-303., DOI: 10.1023/B:SCIE.0000034375.39385.84
  28. Paolini A., Quagli A. (2013), Una riflessione sugli strumenti bibliometrici per la valutazione della ricerca e una proposta: il real impact factor, Management Control, 3, pp. 99-115., DOI: 10.3280/MACO2013-003007
  29. Piazzini T. (2010), Gli indicatori bibliometrici: riflessioni sparse per un uso attento e consapevole,, 1, 1, pp. 63-86., DOI: 10.4403/
  30. Rebora G., Turri M. (2010), Lo sviluppo dei sistemi di valutazione della ricerca: un’analisi critica dell’esperienza italiana, Atti del 33° Convegno dell'accademia italiana di economia aziendale, Milano, Università Bocconi.
  31. RiskManagement,53,9,pp.26-30.HarzingA.W.(2008),Reflectionsontheh-index,
  32. Rusconi G. (2014), La valutazione della ricerca scientifica. Alcuni spunti di riflessione dopo le recenti esperienze in Italia, Management Control, 1, pp. 73-85., DOI: 10.3280/MACO2014-001005
  33. Seglen P.O. (1997), Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research, Bmj, 314, 7079, pp. 497.
  34. Vicari S. (2014), Metodo e linguaggio nell’accademia economico-aziendale italiana, Economia Aziendale Online, 5, 1, pp. 63-71., DOI: 10.4485/ea2038-5498.005.0008
  35. West J.D. (2010), Eigenfactor: ranking and mapping scientific knowledge, Seattle, University of Washington.

Marco Giuliani, Stefano Marasca, Research evaluation and bibliometrics: reflections from a business economics perspective in "MANAGEMENT CONTROL" 1/2015, pp. 133-151, DOI:10.3280/MACO2015-001006


FrancoAngeli is a member of Publishers International Linking Association a not for profit orgasnization wich runs the CrossRef service, enabing links to and from online scholarly content