Valuation of Research Evaluation Indicators in Different Scientific Fields in Iran

Because of different characteristics, the research performance comparison of different fields is not possible, but research and technology policy makers need to compare researchers and institutions and evaluate them from various aspects, including capability, performance, efficiency, productivity, and so on. The present work aimed to consider the differences between research performances of various fields and weighting and valuating of scientific production (publications) of that field, justify and normalize them. The method of research is scientometrics and performed with using literature review, content analysis and descriptive-survey techniques. A sample (n=106) of the productive researchers in the years 2008 to 2011 introduced by the Ministry of Science, Research and Technology in four areas: engineering, basic sciences, social sciences and humanities, and medical sciences. According to the questions of research, researchers’ CV (by researcher made checklist) was collected and analyzed. To determine the weight and ratio of publications, Shannon Entropy and AHP methods were used. According to the research findings in the field of engineering, inventions (0.142); in basic sciences , international papers (0.074); in humanities, books (0.174); and also in medical sciences, international papers (0.111) had the most weights rather than other formats. According to the amount and importance of formats in various fields, the weight of publications is different. The value of each format rather than the others, calculated with matrix and by division of obtained weights. With attention to the previous literatures and approved hypothesis of this research about differences between indicators of various field it is necessary to results of the research and weighted publication indicators use for evaluation, monitoring of research performance and assessing the productivity and efficiency of comparison of fields and related disciplines to achieve real results which is based on policy making. According to the changes of publication practices over time and changes in covering of evaluated databases, it is necessary to revise the values and the ratios constantly.