Towards a new scenary for research assessment: the institutional repository (AIR) of Milan University


The aim of this work is to report about the unconventional use of an institutional repository, that has been used as data source to assess the scientific production and productivity within the Departments of the Faculty of Letters at the University of Milan.

The analysis of the results of the pilot shows that the archive and the data manager are a valid instrument to aggregate and analyze large quantities of bibliographic metadata, so the pilot can be extended to the whole university.

A comparison with other universities is difficult since the use of institutional respositories is not so widespread, and there is no security on the coverage and the comprehensiveness of the data inside them. To conclude, there is a strong necessity to widen the presence and the usage of institutional repositories, according to the Recommendations of the Conference of the Rectors of Italian Universities (CRUI), and to update methodologies and processes of evaluation considering new models of production, fruition, and dissemination of scientific outputs. Moreover, the open access approach not only widens the potentialities of an easier access to information, but modifies the fruition of the information itself.

The evaluative scenario must adapt to the new circumstances, as well as web circulation of the information has modified the measurability of contents with respect to the results in the publications themselves.


Open Access; Institutional repositories; Humanities; Universities; Research assessment

Full Text:

PDF (Italiano)




Association of Research Libraries. The Research Library's Role in Digital Repository Services: Final Report of the ARL Digital Repository Issues Task Force. 2009. Online.

Bartolini, S. Come migliorare la qualità della ricerca in Italia? L'esperienza della valutazione triennale della ricerca nelle scienze politiche e sociali (2001-2003). Sociologica 17 settembre. (2007). Online.

Bollen, Johan, et al. A Principal Component Analysis of 39 Scientific Impact Measures. PLoS ONE 4.6. doi : 10.1371/journal.pone.0006022. (Giu. 2009): e6022. Online.

Bollen, Johan, et al. Clickstream Data Yields High-Resolution Maps of Science. PLoS ONE 4.3. doi : 10.1371/journal.pone.0004803. (Mar. 2009): e4803. Online.

Borgman, C. L. Scholarship in the Digital Age: information, infrastructure and the internet. MIT press, 2007. A stampa.

Cameron, N. e Sh. Wu. Article-level metrics and the evolution of scientific impact. PLoS Biol 7(11): e1000242. doi : 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000242. (2009). Online.

CRUI. Gruppo di lavoro sull'accesso aperto. L'Open Access e la valutazione della ricerca scientifica. Raccomandazioni. 2009. Online.

Day, M. Institutional repositories and research assessment. 2005. doi : Online.

ERA. Submission Guidelines. 2010. Online.

Expert Group on AUBR. Assessing Europe's University based research. 2010. Online.

Guedon, Jean-Claude. Open access and the divide between "mainstream" and "peripheral" science. 2008. Online.

Harnad, Stevan. Open Access Scientometrics and the UK Research Assessment Exercise. Scientometrics 79,1. doi : 10.1007/s11192- 009- 0409- z. (2009). Online.

Hellqvist, B. Referencing in the Humanities and its implications for citation analysis. JASIST 61(2). (2010). A stampa.

IMU. Citation statistics. 2008. Online.

JISC. Scholarly Communication Group. Open Access Citation Information. Final report Extended version. 2005. Online.

JISC, SURF. Copyright toolbox. 2007. Online.

Larsen, P. O. e M. von Inns. The rate of growth in scientific publication and the decline in coverage provided by Science Citation Index. Scientometrics 83,1. doi : 10.1007/s11192-010-0202-z. (2010). Online.

Lehman, S., A. D. Jackson e B. E. Lautrup. Measures for measures. Nature 444. doi : 10.1038/4441003a. (2006). Online.

1Lynch, Cliord A. Institutional Repositories: Essential Infrastructure for Scholarship in the Digital Age. ARL Bimonthly Report 226. (2003): 17. Online.

Moed, H. Research assessments in Social Sciences andHumanities, Bologna, 12-13 dicembre 2008. 2008. Online.

Nederhof, Anton J. Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the social sciences and the humanities: a review. Scientometrics 66,1. (2006). A stampa.

Nederhof, Anton J., Ted N. van Leeuwen e Antony F. J. van Raan. Highly cited non-journal publications in political science, economics and psychology: a  first exploration. Scientometrics 82,1. doi: 10.1007/s11192- 009- 0086- y. (2010). Online.

Reale, E. Valutazione delle pubblicazioni scientiche e Open Access, In La biblioteca scientifica e tecnologica: servizi per l'informazione scientifica, Roma (Italy), 17 April 2008. Online.

Reale, E., et al. Unipub project: Methodologies for the characterisation of the publication output of higher education institutions using institutional databases. 2010. A stampa.

SPARC Science Commons. Open doors and Open minds:What faculty authors can do to ensure open access to their work through their institution. 2008. Online.

Swan, Alma. The Open Access citation advantage: studies and results to date. 2010. Online.

Thompson, J. Wolfe. The death of the scholarly monograph in the Humanities? Citation patterns in literary scholarship. Libri 52,3. (2002). A stampa.

Torres-Salinas, D. e H.F. Moed. Library Catalog. Analysis as a tool in studies of social sciences and humanities: An exploratory study of published book titles in Economics, Journal of Informetrics. 3,1. doi : 10.1016/j.joi.2008.10.002. (2009). Online.

Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM


Copyright (c) 2010 Paola Galimberti

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. is a journal of UNIFI-SAGAS published by EUM - edizioni università di macerata