TY - JOUR
T1 - Rejoinder to the Response to "The Scholarly Capital Model"
AU - Cuellar, Michael J.
AU - Vidgen, Richard
AU - Takeda, Hirotoshi
AU - Truex, Duane
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 by the Association for Information Systems.
PY - 2016/1/1
Y1 - 2016/1/1
N2 - Crowston (2016) makes several criticisms of “the scholarly capital model”. In sum, he argues that we fail to develop novel measures, continue the worst aspects of the current system in terms of encouraging co-authorships with old boys, reinforce journal list fetishes, and that the SCM still provides ample ways to game the system. In response to his criticisms, we reaffirm that SCM’s aims to address the question “does this scholar possess sufficient scholarly capital to enable our organization to achieve its research goals?”. We argue that examining the research capital that a scholar brings to the organization is an improvement over the current method of evaluating scholars based on their number of publications in ranked journals. The profile of measures that we propose, while not as novel as altmetrics, encourages widespread co-authorships, de-centers the journal lists, and, thus, eliminates the journal fetishism and ecological fallacy present in the current system.
AB - Crowston (2016) makes several criticisms of “the scholarly capital model”. In sum, he argues that we fail to develop novel measures, continue the worst aspects of the current system in terms of encouraging co-authorships with old boys, reinforce journal list fetishes, and that the SCM still provides ample ways to game the system. In response to his criticisms, we reaffirm that SCM’s aims to address the question “does this scholar possess sufficient scholarly capital to enable our organization to achieve its research goals?”. We argue that examining the research capital that a scholar brings to the organization is an improvement over the current method of evaluating scholars based on their number of publications in ranked journals. The profile of measures that we propose, while not as novel as altmetrics, encourages widespread co-authorships, de-centers the journal lists, and, thus, eliminates the journal fetishism and ecological fallacy present in the current system.
KW - Ecological Fallacy
KW - Journal Rankings
KW - Research Evaluation
KW - Scholarly Capital Model
UR - https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/info-sys-facpubs/178
UR - https://aisel.aisnet.org/jais/vol17/iss1/1/
U2 - 10.17705/1jais.00417
DO - 10.17705/1jais.00417
M3 - Article
SN - 1558-3457
VL - 17
JO - Journal of the Association for Information Systems
JF - Journal of the Association for Information Systems
ER -