This article deals with the impact of external R&D evaluations as one of the institutional factors that can encourage (or discourage) the progress of the social sciences. A critical overview is presented of the increasing use of bibliometric indicators in the external R&D evaluation procedures employed by the Slovenian Research Agency, which is the leading research council for financing the public sector of social sciences in Slovenia. We attempt to establish that, in order to ensure a good external R&D evaluation practice for a small social science community, it is insufficient to only have reliable bibliometric meta-databases. It is argued that it is equally important to formulate very precise criteria to ascertain their validity.
COBISS.SI-ID: 32379229
In the chapter authors present the analysis of co-authorship network of the researchers who work in the field of microbiology at the University of Ljubljana. The analysed network is based on personal bibliographies of the researchers that are freely available on the web-page of Slovenian Current Research Information System (SICRIS). The results show that the number of relevant scientific publications is growing in the discipline, and over the years, researchers publish higher number of publications. With the increasing number of publications over time, also the stability of the average number of evaluation points for publication (depending on the National Research Organizations evaluation of scientific excellence) is rising. The average number of evaluation points is slowly increasing over the years. Authors continue with presentation of collaboration among formal working groups and laboratories and among informal groups indicated by method of islands. The results of both approaches show a clear division between central and peripheral groups in the field of microbiology. Contribution is concluded by comparing the key players in the field of microbiology according to the different dimensions of centrality and scientific excellence.
COBISS.SI-ID: 3336584
The article explores some of the issues that have arisen in the discourse on pharmaceutical cognitive enhancement (PCE), that is, the use of stimulant drugs such as methylphenidate, amphetamine and modafinil by healthy individuals of various populations with the aim of improving cognitive performance. Specifically, we explore the presumed sizes of existing PCE user populations and the policy actions that have been proposed regarding the trend of PCE. We begin with an introductory examination of the academic stances and philosophical issues involved in defining PCE. We then focus on an examination of the population sizes of presumed current PCE users that have been listed in the academic literature on PCE, on presuppositions, which have been problematized by some authors as based on anecdotal or misinterpreted survey data. We follow this with an empirical examination of a potential PCE user population in a national context (students at the University of Ljubljana in Slovenia). We then proceed to examine the regulatory options proposed in the academic literature to address PCE, finally comparing them with an empirical overview of the policy recommendations on PCE produced in the multinational context of several national ethics advisory bodies (EABs) in Europe. Our main conclusion is that there is still little debate among the national EABs on what type of public policy responses, if any, are needed to address PCE in European countries, and that the issues they do address are similar to those discussed and proposed in the academic articles on PCE.
COBISS.SI-ID: 32151389