Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
S. Harnad (2009)
Multiple metrics required to measure research performanceNature, 457
Péter András (2011)
Research: metrics, quality, and management implicationsResearch Evaluation, 20
J. Clark, J. Warren (2006)
In Search of the Primary Suppliers of IS Research: Who Are They and Where Did They Come From?Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst., 18
J. Hagedoorn, Myriam Cloodt (2003)
Measuring innovative performance: is there an advantage in using multiple indicators?Research Policy, 32
W. Snizek (1995)
Some observations on the use of bibliometric indicators in the assignment of university chairsScientometrics, 32
S. Petter, D. Straub, Arun Rai (2007)
Specifying Formative Constructs in Information Systems ResearchMIS Q., 31
Rajdeep Grewal, Joseph Cote, H. Baumgartner (2004)
Multicollinearity and Measurement Error in Structural Equation Models: Implications for Theory TestingMarketing Science, 23
C. Robinson, R. Schumacker (2009)
Interaction Effects: Centering, Variance Inflation Factor, and Interpretation Issues
James Trieschmann, A. Dennis (2000)
Serving Multiple Constituencies in the Business School: MBA Program vs. Research Performance
R. Maccallum, M. Browne (1993)
The use of causal indicators in covariance structure models: some practical issues.Psychological bulletin, 114 3
Nicole Mitchell (2008)
Library 2.0: A guide to participatory library serviceJournal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 59
R. Costas, M. Bordons (2007)
The h-index: Advantages, limitations and its relation with other bibliometric indicators at the micro levelJ. Informetrics, 1
M. Matzke (2005)
F1000Prime recommendation of An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output.
J. Cortina (1993)
Interaction, Nonlinearity, and Multicollinearity: implications for Multiple Regression:Journal of Management, 19
Joseph Hair, C. Ringle, M. Sarstedt (2011)
PLS-SEM: Indeed a Silver BulletJournal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19
L. Bornmann, Hans-Dieter Daniel (2007)
What do we know about the h index?J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol., 58
Gad Saad (2006)
Exploring the h-index at the author and journal levels using bibliometric data of productive consumer scholars and business-related journals respectivelyScientometrics, 69
(1995)
Some observations on the use of bibliometric indicators in the assignment of university
A. Diamantopoulos, H. Winklhofer (2001)
Index Construction with Formative Indicators: An Alternative to Scale DevelopmentJournal of Marketing Research, 38
A. Abbasi, J. Altmann, L. Hossain (2011)
Identifying the effects of co-authorship networks on the performance of scholars: A correlation and regression analysis of performance measures and social network analysis measuresJ. Informetrics, 5
M. Henzinger, Jacob Suñol, Ingmar Weber (2009)
The stability of the h-indexScientometrics, 84
David Belsley, E. Kuh, R. Welsch (1980)
Regression Diagnostics: Identifying Influential Data and Sources of Collinearity
Cheryl Jarvis, Scott MacKenzie, P. Podsakoff (2003)
A Critical Review of Construct Indicators and Measurement Model Misspecification in Marketing and Consumer ResearchJournal of Consumer Research, 30
P. Nagpaul, Santanu Roy (2003)
Constructing a multi-objective measure of research performanceScientometrics, 56
L. Brown, J. Gardner (1985)
Using Citation Analysis to Assess the Impact of Journals and Articles on Contemporary Accounting Research (CAR)Journal of Accounting Research, 23
E. Rinia, T. Leeuwen, H.G Vuren, A. Raan (1998)
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF A SET OF BIBLIOMETRIC INDICATORS AND CENTRAL PEER REVIEW CRITERIA. EVALUATION OF CONDENSED MATTER PHYSICS IN THE NETHERLANDSResearch Policy, 27
A. Raan (1996)
Advanced bibliometric methods as quantitative core of peer review based evaluation and foresight exercisesScientometrics, 36
V. Mahajan, A. Jain, Michel Bergier (1977)
Parameter Estimation in Marketing Models in the Presence of Multicollinearity: An Application of Ridge RegressionJournal of Marketing Research, 14
B. Martin (1996)
The use of multiple indicators in the assessment of basic researchScientometrics, 36
W. Glänzel (2006)
On the Opportunities and Limitations of the H-index, 1
T. Groot, Teresa García-Valderrama (2006)
Research quality and efficiency: An analysis of assessments and management issues in Dutch economics and business research programsResearch Policy, 35
C. Liao (2011)
How to improve research quality? Examining the impacts of collaboration intensity and member diversity in collaboration networksScientometrics, 86
R. Kostoff (1996)
Performance measures for government-sponsored research: Overview and backgroundScientometrics, 36
L. Freeman (1978)
Centrality in social networks conceptual clarificationSocial Networks, 1
L. Egghe (2006)
Theory and practise of the g-indexScientometrics, 69
H. Inhaber, K. Przednowek (1976)
Quality of Research and the Nobel PrizesSocial Studies of Science, 6
L. Leydesdorff (2009)
How are new citation-based journal indicators adding to the bibliometric toolbox?ArXiv, abs/0909.4457
R. Costas, T. Leeuwen, M. Bordons (2010)
A bibliometric classificatory approach for the study and assessment of research performance at the individual level: The effects of age on productivity and impactJ. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol., 61
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to enrich the understanding of how to form a multi-item assessment and what approaches can be applied for researchers. Design/methodology/approach – This study proposes three ways to form a multi-item assessment (i.e. separate, formative and reflective approaches) and further makes a comparison between these three approaches. Findings – The results show that multi-item assessment, particularly for formative and reflective constructs, has greater explanatory power in the research model. Finally, this study provides a roadmap to guide future researchers’ decision strategy for selecting multi-item assessments. Originality/value – Due to the multi-faceted nature of research, using a single indicator to judge a scholar’s research performance will never reveal a multi-faceted picture and can easily result in measurement bias. In this vein, researchers should use different evaluation approaches and indicators to address various forms of research outcomes. However, prior studies rarely adopt multi-item scales to evaluate research performance and seldom discuss how to build a composite construct of research performance. This study aims to fill this research gap in the literature.
Online Information Review – Emerald Publishing
Published: Aug 10, 2015
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.