Über wissenschaftliche Exzellenz und Wettbewerb

Gerald Schweiger

2023-10-18

Abstract:The pursuit of excellence seems to be the True North of academia. What is meant by excellence? Can excellence be measured? This article discusses the concept of excellence in the context of research and competition.

General Economics

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Impact Vitality - A Measure for Excellent Scientists

Nadine Rons,Lucy Amez

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1307.6770

2013-07-25

Digital Libraries

Abstract:In many countries and at European level, research policy increasingly focuses on 'excellent' researchers. The concept of excellence however is complex and multidimensional. For individual scholars it involves talents for innovative knowledge creation and successful transmission to peers, as well as management capacities. Excellence is also a comparative concept, implying the ability to surpass others [TIJSSEN, 2003]. Grants are in general awarded based on assessments by expert committees. While peer review is a widely accepted practice, it nevertheless is also subject to criticism. At higher aggregation levels, peer assessments are often supported by quantitative measures. At individual level, most of these measures are much less appropriate and there is a need for new, dedicated indicators.
An international perspective on the German Excellence Initiative

FENG Li-yin,ZHONG Zhou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1001-4519.2009.03.002

2009-01-01

Abstract:In every country in the world, politicians, scholars, university administrators and others are concerned with the quality of their nation’s universities. In this article, I look at the way in which one major world power, Germany, has reacted to the realisation that its universities are not regarded as excellent around the world, and that this judgement is supported by data on citations and other measures. The German government has reacted to this awareness by putting significant sums of money into a small number of universities to sharpen and deepen their excellence in research and scholarship. This approach imitates that taken in the United States and the United Kingdom. In these countries, which dominate university rankings, most research money goes into a small number of elite universities, which also attract the best-qualified students. But we need to realise that there is a difference between having a few top universities, and having a good university system. In the modern world, all nations need a growing supply of skilled, innovative professionals, to build their economies and to run public services. It would be wrong to prioritise competing with Harvard above having a large, effective higher education sector. Excellence, even on the world stage, is only one aspect of effective education.
Excellence everywhere? Regional development of French scientific output and visibility

Béatrice Milard,Michel Grossetti

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2019.1581362

IF: 4.595

2019-03-29

Regional Studies

Abstract:This paper investigates the notion of scientific 'excellence' at the heart of public research policies by comparing it with the situation regarding the regional development of scientific activity in France. The case presented is based on bibliometric analysis of chemistry publications in French cities between 1985 and 2010, during which the policies of excellence were still not effective. It is asserted that the trend was towards an identical level of excellence across the country's different cities and that the dynamics of regional cities depends on them being 'equipped' with researchers, internationalized and specialized in emerging fields.

economics,environmental studies,regional & urban planning,geography
Comment: ‘national Greatness’ Versus Real National Greatness

Frank Wilczek

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/scin.2008.5591740824

2008-01-01

Science News

Abstract:Science NewsVolume 174, Issue 8 p. 32-32 Department Comment: ‘national greatness’ versus real national greatness Frank Wilczek, Frank Wilczek Frankwilczek.com MIT is a Nobel laureate in physics and an incoming member of the Board of Trustees of Society for Science & PublicSearch for more papers by this author Frank Wilczek, Frank Wilczek Frankwilczek.com MIT is a Nobel laureate in physics and an incoming member of the Board of Trustees of Society for Science & PublicSearch for more papers by this author First published: 30 September 2009 https://doi.org/10.1002/scin.2008.5591740824AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume174, Issue811 October 2008Pages 32-32 RelatedInformation
The Costs of Competition in Distributing Scarce Research Funds

Gerald Schweiger,Adrian Barnett,Peter van den Besselaar,Lutz Bornmann,Andreas De Block,John P.A. Ioannidis,Ulf Sandström,Stijn Conix

2024-03-26

Abstract:Research funding systems are not isolated systems - they are embedded in a larger scientific system with an enormous influence on the system. This paper aims to analyze the allocation of competitive research funding from different perspectives: How reliable are decision processes for funding? What are the economic costs of competitive funding? How does competition for funds affect doing risky research? How do competitive funding environments affect scientists themselves, and which ethical issues must be considered? We attempt to identify gaps in our knowledge of research funding systems; we propose recommendations for policymakers and funding agencies, including empirical experiments of decision processes and the collection of data on these processes. With our recommendations we hope to contribute to developing improved ways of organizing research funding.

General Economics
Character traits: Scientific virtue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nj7597-139a

IF: 64.8

2016-04-01

Nature

Abstract:Elite scientists generally agree on what character traits make for excellent science.

multidisciplinary sciences
Promoting research quality

Ulrich Dirnagl,Nonia Pariente

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3002554

IF: 9.8

2024-02-29

PLoS Biology

Abstract:Plenty of awards recognize scientific contributions, but a unique and important one honors those whose efforts significantly enhance the quality and robustness of research. We discuss why this is important to promote trust in science.

biochemistry & molecular biology,biology
Leading for research excellence and integrity: A qualitative investigation of the relationship-building practices of exemplary principal investigators

Alison L. Antes,Ashley Kuykendall,James M. DuBois

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2019.1611429

2019-04-03

Accountability in Research

Abstract:We conducted semi-structured, telephone interviews with 52 federally funded researchers nominated as exemplars for their integrity and professional conduct, and their scientific achievements. The aim was to identify the practices they report utilizing to build respectful relationships in their teams. We found four practices, holding meetings, providing supervision and guidance, encouraging shared ownership, and expressing values, which were also important to performing high-quality, compliant research, were essential to fostering relationships. The most common practice described for building relationships was actively and deliberately cultivating a positive team environment. Additionally, exemplars described the need to lead by example, tailor their approach to the needs of individuals, address interpersonal conflict, and hire team members cautiously. We also identified practices the exemplars reported as important to managing the demands of their work and found that encouraging shared ownership and tailoring to individuals supported this goal. Additional strategies related to prioritization and planning, seeking advice, engaging in self-care, and managing emotional reactions. Finally, we identified priorities guiding the exemplars' practices. Key priorities included providing outstanding mentoring, building collaborations and relationships, and engaging in discovery and innovation. Investigators require exceptional leadership skills but receive limited systematic leadership training. Addressing this gap would advance research excellence and integrity.
Intrinsic and Extrinsic Science: A Dialectic of Scientific Fame

Gregory J Feist

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616660535

Abstract:In this article, I argue that scientific fame and impact exists on a continuum from the mundane to the transformative/revolutionary. Ideally, one achieves fame and impact in science by synthesizing two extreme career prototypes: intrinsic and extrinsic research. The former is guided by interest, curiosity, passion, gut, and intuition for important untapped topics. The latter is guided by money, grants, and/or what is being published in top-tier journals. Assessment of fame and impact in science ultimately rests on productivity (publication) and some variation of its impact (citations). In addition to those traditional measures of impact, there are some relatively new metrics (e.g., the h index and altmetrics). If psychology is to achieve consensual cumulative progress and better rates of replication, I propose that upcoming psychologists would do well to understand that success is not equal to fame and that individual career success is not necessarily the same as disciplinary success. Finally, if one is to have a successful and perhaps even famous career in psychological science, a good strategy would be to synthesize intrinsic and extrinsic motives for one's research.
Scientific Utopia: II. Restructuring incentives and practices to promote truth over publishability

Brian A. Nosek,Jeffrey Robert Spies,Matt Motyl

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/k4bgq

2016-08-29

Abstract:An academic scientist’s professional success depends on publishing. Publishing norms emphasize novel, positive results. As such, disciplinary incentives encourage design, analysis, and reporting decisions that elicit positive results and ignore negative results. Prior reports demonstrate how these incentives inflate the rate of false effects in published science. When incentives favor novelty over replication, false results persist in the literature unchallenged, reducing efficiency in knowledge accumulation. Previous suggestions to address this problem are unlikely to be effective. For example, a journal of negative results publishes otherwise unpublishable reports. This enshrines the low status of the journal and its content. The persistence of false findings can be meliorated with strategies that make the fundamental but abstract accuracy motive – getting it right – competitive with the more tangible and concrete incentive – getting it published. We develop strategies for improving scientific practices and knowledge accumulation that account for ordinary human motivations and biases.
In Search of Excellence and Equity in Physics

Emanuela Barzi,S. James Gates Jr.,Roxanne Springer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2203.10393

2022-10-27

Abstract:Equal opportunity is central to the concept of meritocracy. Opportunity and leadership should go to the people most qualified by performance, and not on the basis of arbitrary or irrelevant attributes. This principle is arguably most important for high-level leadership due to their outsized impact on the field. At the moment, many in the community perceive that the choice of leaders is infused with a lack of meritocracy and too often driven by cronyism. This is possibly a reason why far worse underrepresentation persists than could be expected from a functioning meritocracy. If we want to change this, we need to change our behavior, i.e., practices.

Physics and Society,High Energy Physics - Experiment
Some Tradeoffs of Competition in Grant Contests

Kyle R. Myers

2022-07-06

Abstract:When funding public goods, resources are often allocated via mechanisms that resemble contests, especially in the case of research grants. A common critique of these contests is that they induce ``too much'' effort from participants. This need not be true if the effort in the contest is itself directed towards the public good. This papers analyzes survey data on scientists' time use and finds that scientists allocate their time in a way that is consistent with fundraising effort (e.g., grant writing) having inherent scientific value -- scientists who spend more time fundraising do not spent significantly less time on research even after conditioning on confounding factors. Theoretical models of contests are used to show that the presence of such a positive effort externality, where scientists generate social value when pursuing grants, changes the relationship between competition and the aggregate productivity of a grant contest. Ensuring that scientists exert socially valuable effort to obtain grants is increasingly important as grant contests become more competitive.

General Economics,Econometrics
Field size as a predictor of “excellence.” The selection of subject fields in Germany’s Excellence Initiative

Thomas Heinze,Isabel M. Habicht,Paul Eberhardt,Dirk Tunger

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.03.06.583816

2024-03-08

Abstract:We investigate the selection of subject fields in Germany’s “excellence initiative,” a two-phase funding scheme administered by the German Research Foundation (DFG) from 2005 to 2017 to increase international competitiveness of scientific research at German universities. While most empirical studies have examined the “excellence initiative’s” effects at the university level (“elite universities”), we focus on subject fields within universities. Based on both descriptive and logistic regression analyses, we find that the “excellence initiative” reveals a stable social order of public universities based on organizational size, that field selection is biased toward those fields with many professors and considerable grant funding, and that funding success in the second phase largely follows decisions from the first phase. We discuss these results and suggest avenues for future research.

Scientific Communication and Education
Unsustainable Growth, Hyper-Competition, and Worth in Life Science Research: Narrowing Evaluative Repertoires in Doctoral and Postdoctoral Scientists’ Work and Lives

Maximilian Fochler,Ulrike Felt,Ruth Müller

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-016-9292-y

IF: 2.356

2016-03-04

Minerva

Abstract:There is a crisis of valuation practices in the current academic life sciences, triggered by unsustainable growth and “hyper-competition.” Quantitative metrics in evaluating researchers are seen as replacing deeper considerations of the quality and novelty of work, as well as substantive care for the societal implications of research. Junior researchers are frequently mentioned as those most strongly affected by these dynamics. However, their own perceptions of these issues are much less frequently considered. This paper aims at contributing to a better understanding of the interplay between how research is valued and how young researchers learn to live, work and produce knowledge within academia. We thus analyze how PhD students and postdocs in the Austrian life sciences ascribe worth to people, objects and practices as they talk about their own present and future lives in research. We draw on literature from the field of valuation studies and its interest in how actors refer to different forms of valuation to account for their actions. We explore how young researchers are socialized into different valuation practices in different stages of their growing into science. Introducing the concept of “regimes of valuation” we show that PhD students relate to a wider evaluative repertoire while postdocs base their decisions on one dominant regime of valuing research. In conclusion, we discuss the implications of these findings for the epistemic and social development of the life sciences, and for other scientific fields.

education & educational research,history & philosophy of science,social sciences, interdisciplinary
Absolute and specific measures of research group excellence

O. Mryglod,R. Kenna,Yu. Holovatch,B. Berche

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0874-7

2012-10-02

Abstract:A desirable goal of scientific management is to introduce, if it exists, a simple and reliable way to measure the scientific excellence of publicly-funded research institutions and universities to serve as a basis for their ranking and financing. While citation-based indicators and metrics are easily accessible, they are far from being universally accepted as way to automate or inform evaluation processes or to replace evaluations based on peer review. Here we consider absolute measurements of research excellence at an amalgamated, institutional level and specific measures of research excellence as performance per head. Using biology research institutions in the UK as a test case, we examine the correlations between peer-review-based and citation-based measures of research excellence on these two scales. We find that citation-based indicators are very highly correlated with peer-evaluated measures of group strength but are poorly correlated with group quality. Thus, and almost paradoxically, our analysis indicates that citation counts could possibly form a basis for deciding on how to fund research institutions but they should not be used as a basis for ranking them in terms of quality.

Applications,Digital Libraries,Physics and Society
Towards responsible research assessment: How to reward research quality

Anne Gärtner,Daniel Leising,Felix D Schönbrodt,Felix D. Schönbrodt

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3002553

IF: 9.8

2024-02-27

PLoS Biology

Abstract:Researchers would be more willing to prioritize research quality over quantity if the incentive structure of the academic system aligned with this goal. The winner of a 2023 Einstein Foundation Award for Promoting Quality in Research explains how they rose to this challenge.

biochemistry & molecular biology,biology
Expertise Development and Scientific Thinking

Erno Lehtinen,Jake McMullen,Hans Gruber

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-24215-2_8

2019-01-01

Abstract:The focus of expertise research is on exceptionally advanced performance in professions that require long academic—and at least partly scientific—education before entering into work. Surprisingly, only a few studies have systematically examined the role of scientific thinking in expertise development. Many studies have shown that initial scientific knowledge seems to disappear during the course of expertise development. This conclusion was challenged by the theory of encapsulation, which describes how formal scientific knowledge is integrated with practical knowledge during work experience. This raises questions for expertise research: How do scientists themselves reason and how do they develop these skills? The aim of this chapter is to summarise existing findings about the relationship between expertise development and scientific thinking.
University Rankings in Sport Science: A True Reflection of Excellence?

Ivana Matic Girard,Olivier Girard

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2024-0109

IF: 4.211

2024-09-15

International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance

Abstract:Background: University rankings often serve as benchmarks for excellence in academic evaluation. For example, ShanghaiRanking data from 2016 to 2023 for the Global Ranking of Sport Science Schools and Departments reveal consistent dominance by Australia (23.1%), Canada (18.0%), and the United States (12.0%), collectively counting over half of the top 50 universities worldwide. Nevertheless, there is uncertainty about how the methodology behind these rankings shapes a reality as much as it reflects one. Purpose: Our intention is to discuss the complexity of university rankings, using ShanghaiRanking as an example, to highlight how these rankings reflect academic excellence within the field of sport science. Current Evidence: When ranking universities in sport science, several aspects of academic excellence could be considered in addition to research metrics currently considered in ShanghaiRanking (publication, citation, citations per publication, top 25% journal publications, and internationally collaborated publications). These aspects may include (1) teaching quality, (2) practical training, (3) industry links and employability, (4) support services, (5) facilities and equipment, (6) international network, (7) community engagement, (8) sustainability and ethical practices, and (9) interdisciplinary approach. Altogether, they could provide a more comprehensive view of the quality and effectiveness of a sport-science program. Conclusions: The ranking of sport-science institutions poses a complex challenge due to diverse factors influencing academic excellence. Engaging in a broader dialogue and refining internationally relevant evaluation methodologies are crucial. These steps enable comparability between countries and provide a holistic understanding of the multidimensional nature of academic excellence in sport science.

physiology,sport sciences
Performing excellence and gender balance in higher education

Vivian Anette Lagesen,Ivana Suboticki

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-023-01138-1

2023-12-06

Higher Education

Abstract:Universities are expected to strive for excellence but also for gender balance. Narrow interpretations of excellence in universities hinder women's advancement in academia. In this paper, we ask if there are ways that these policies may be reconciled. Excellence is an "empty signifier" that must be filled with meaning. We have investigated how Heads of Departments enact "excellence" and gender balance in hiring processes in four Norwegian universities. Many HoD argued for broadening excellence criteria and framed excellence as a collective rather than an individual concern. This allows for reconciling top-down institutional demands for excellence and diversity while catering to local needs. Thus, our paper suggests that in a context where increased diversity among faculty is called for, this may open up a space for critical reflection about the criteria for assessing academic quality.

education & educational research
"Am I Famous Yet?" Judging Scholarly Merit in Psychological Science: An Introduction

Robert J Sternberg

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616661777

Abstract:The purpose of this symposium is to consider new ways of judging merit in academia, especially with respect to research in psychological science. First, I discuss the importance of merit-based evaluation and the purpose of this symposium. Next, I review some previous ideas about judging merit-especially creative merit-and I describe some of the main criteria used by institutions today for judging the quality of research in psychological science. Finally, I suggest a new criterion that institutions and individuals might use and draw some conclusions.

Über wissenschaftliche Exzellenz und Wettbewerb

Impact Vitality - A Measure for Excellent Scientists

An international perspective on the German Excellence Initiative

Excellence everywhere? Regional development of French scientific output and visibility

Comment: ‘national Greatness’ Versus Real National Greatness

The Costs of Competition in Distributing Scarce Research Funds

Character traits: Scientific virtue

Promoting research quality

Leading for research excellence and integrity: A qualitative investigation of the relationship-building practices of exemplary principal investigators

Intrinsic and Extrinsic Science: A Dialectic of Scientific Fame

Scientific Utopia: II. Restructuring incentives and practices to promote truth over publishability

In Search of Excellence and Equity in Physics

Some Tradeoffs of Competition in Grant Contests

Field size as a predictor of “excellence.” The selection of subject fields in Germany’s Excellence Initiative

Unsustainable Growth, Hyper-Competition, and Worth in Life Science Research: Narrowing Evaluative Repertoires in Doctoral and Postdoctoral Scientists’ Work and Lives

Absolute and specific measures of research group excellence

Towards responsible research assessment: How to reward research quality

Expertise Development and Scientific Thinking

University Rankings in Sport Science: A True Reflection of Excellence?

Performing excellence and gender balance in higher education

"Am I Famous Yet?" Judging Scholarly Merit in Psychological Science: An Introduction