Recent years have seen a rise in awareness around “responsible metrics” and calls for research assessment reforms internationally. Yet within the field of quantitative science studies and in... Show moreRecent years have seen a rise in awareness around “responsible metrics” and calls for research assessment reforms internationally. Yet within the field of quantitative science studies and in research policy contexts, concerns about the limitations of evaluative bibliometrics are almost as old as the tools themselves. Given that many of the concerns articulated in recent reform movements go back decades, why has momentum for change grown only in the past ten years? In this paper, we draw on analytical insights from the sociology of social movements on collective action frames to chart the emergence, development, and expansion of “responsible metrics” as a professional reform movement. Through reviewing important texts that have shaped reform efforts, we argue that hitherto, three framings have underpinned the responsible metrics reform agenda: the metrics scepticism framing, the professional-expert framing, and the reflexivity framing. We suggest that while these three framings have co-existed within the responsible metrics movement to date, the “truce” negotiated between these framings may not last indefinitely, especially as the responsible metrics movement extends into wider research assessment reform movements. Show less
Several initiatives have been taken to promote the open availability of bibliographic metadata of scholarly publications in Crossref. We present an up-to-date overview of the availability of six... Show moreSeveral initiatives have been taken to promote the open availability of bibliographic metadata of scholarly publications in Crossref. We present an up-to-date overview of the availability of six metadata elements in Crossref: reference lists, abstracts, ORCIDs, author affiliations, funding information, and license information. Our analysis shows that the availability of these metadata elements has improved over time, at least for journal articles, the most common publication type in Crossref. However, the analysis also shows that many publishers need to make additional efforts to realize full openness of bibliographic metadata. Show less
Hagenaars, N.; Kruif, T. de; Laar, L. van de; Waltman, L.; Meijer, I.; Levi, M.; Gupta, A. 2019
