Utvärderande bibliometri: en jämförelse mellan två kvalitetsindikatorer

Sammanfattning: This master's thesis aims to explore the field of evaluative bibliometrics. In short, this field of research uses bibliometrics - i.e. the application of mathematical and statistical methods to books and other media of communication - as a research assessment tool. In recent years, evaluative bibliometrics has been an increasingly used method in research evaluation and is today used and implemented in many countries worldwide. Today, in Sweden, we can also see that evaluative bibliometrics is highly recognised and, in some cases, used in practice. In our empirical study two bibliometric indicators for research evaluation are compared: the crown indicator and an indicator recently developed at Karolinska Institutet. These two indicators are compared and analyzed on three different levels of aggregation. The first level focuses on Swedish authors; the second level on organizations; the third on subject categories. The results show that there are indeed differences in how the indicators measure the performance of studied units. In some cases these differences are quite remarkable and could have severe consequences for individual authors and organizations in a ranking context. However, we were not able to determine what significance the different levels had for the results.