| Abstract: | Comments on the article by A. R. Buss (see record 1976-26634-001), which purports to evaluate Canadian psychology departments in terms of productivity and impact upon the discipline. Publication counts and citation counts from the Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) were tabulated for each staff member and totaled for each department. The author suggests that his exercise will give us some lessons in the methodology of the sociology of science, as it pertains to the problem of evaluating the quality of departments within a discipline. While it is questionable whether such a unitary evaluation can be done at all, more importantly the article raises two other questions: What are the possible purposes of such a task? Has Buss's article done an adequate job of doing the task regardless of purpose? With reference to the first question, it is virtually impossible to think of any legitimate use to which such finding could be put. On the question as to whether the Buss evaluations are well done, a few obvious points are listed. One of these is Buss's choice of the SSCI, which he admits does not include citations in some important psychological journals. In summary, the Buss paper includes a set of evaluations which serve no useful purpose. Furthermore, they are complete with numerous sources of known error, some of them systematic. The author has added to this all the problems of choice of summarizing values. The reviewer takes offense at his taxes being used for so shallow a purpose. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) |
