Quality and quantity: HSS research evaluation in Italy. A state of the art


Research evaluation in Humanities is a theme of topical interest especially after the start of the national framework for research assessment (VQR 2004-2010). The debate on indicators, on how to correlate quality and quantity, on the notion itself of research quality, is very intense not only for the main characteristics of the research area, but for chronic lack of bibliographic and bibliometric data, too.This paper aims at making the point on what has been done until now, taking into account positive and not positive experiences of other research systems; it tries to individuate some ways to follow in the future: the creation of a bibliographic database according to international standards, a refernce guide for assessing monographs, a better technological exploitation both for distribution and validation of research products, and for their evaluation as well.


ANVUR; Italy; Bibliometric methods; Research Evaluation

Full Text:

Testo (Italiano)




AUBR, Expert group on. Assessing Europe’s University based research, rapp. tecn., European Commission, DG for Research. 2010.

Bonaccorsi, Andrea. “Potenzialità e limiti dell’analisi bibliometrica nelle aree umanistiche e sociali. Verso un programma di lavoro.” (2012): n. pag.

Capaccioni, Andrea, and Giovanna Spina. “La presenza delle riviste italiane di area umanistica e sociale nel Journal Citation Reports (JCR) e nello SCImago Journal Rank (SJR): dati e prime analisi.” 3.1 (2012): n. pag.

direttivo, ANVUR. Consiglio. “La bibliometria della VQR.” (2012): n. pag.

Fiori, Simonetta. “L’università dà i voti agli editori.” (2012): 54. Print.

---. “Laurea DOC. Intervista a S. Benedetto.” (2012): 49. Print.

Hellqvist, Björn. “Referencing in the humanities and its implications for citation analysis.” (2010): n. pag.

Hicks, Diana, and Jian Wang. “Towards a Bibliometric Database for the Social Sciences and Humanities.” (2009): n. pag.

Huang, Mu-hsuan, and Yu-wei Chang. “Characteristics of research output in social sciences and humanities: From a research evaluation perspective.” 59.11 (2008): 1819 -1828.

“Il dibattito sui rankings di riviste.” (2012): n. pag.

KNAW. Quality indicators for research in the Humanities. 2011.

---. Standard evaluation Protocol 2009-2015. 2010.

Kousha, Kayvan, and Mike Thelwall. “Google book search: Citation analysis for social science and the humanities.” 60.8 (2009): 1537–1549.

Lamp, John W. “Journal ranking and the dreams of academics.” 33.4 (2009): 827–830.

Martin, Ben et al. “Towards a bibliometric database for the Social Sciences and Humanities – A European Scoping Project. A report produced for DFG, ESRC, AHRC, NWO, ANR and ESF.” (2010): n. pag.

Moed, Henk F. et al. Options for a comprehensive database of research outputs in Social Sciences & Humanities. Version 6. 2009.

Moed, Henk F., and Andrew Plume. “The multi-dimensional research assessment matrix.” 23 (2011): n. pag.

Pascuzzi, Giovanni. La valutazione dei prodotti scientifici nell’area giuridica. Print.

Ricerca, Comitato di Indirizzo per la Valutazione della. Linee guida per la valutazione della ricerca VTR 2001-2003. 2006.

Torres-Salinas, Daniel, and Henk F. Moed. “Library Catalog Analysis as a tool in studies of social sciences and humanities: An exploratory study of published book titles in Economics.” 3.1 (2009): 9–26.

Wissenschaftsrat. “Empfehlungen zur vergleichenden Forschungsbewertung in den Geisteswissenschaften.” (2010): n. pag.

Zuccala, Alesia, and Thed van Leeuwen. “Book reviews in humanities research evaluations.” 62.October (2011): 1979 -1991.

Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM


Copyright (c) 2012 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