At 10:42 PM 2/15/01 +0000, Irving Scheffe wrote:
>
>
>Suppose we have
>
>
> Citations Grant$
>
>Mary 1051 4 Million
>Fred 12000+ 23 Million
let's think about this ... just as another view of course
if we are really considering citations as a proxy for performance ... then,
by my calculations ... mary gets $38059 PER cite in grants ... while fred
only gets $19167 PER cite in grants ... thus, in this world view ... mary
is getting for MIT much more buck for the cite
if fred is doing all that great ... then proportionately he should be
bringing in MORE per cite ...
just another view of why cites is a very poor indicator ... of performance,
quality, etc.
and, just as an aside ... let's think about just what 12000 cites would
mean??? could there possibly be THAT many people ... THAT interested ... in
the work of fred during the year?
on average, this would mean that about 33 people a DAY are citing his work
... every day of the year ... in order to "cite" ... you have to "write"
... and, it is hard to fathom that there could possibly be that much
writing activity going on where fred is actively on the minds of the writers
not saying there is enough for mary either ... i am just reemphasizing how
uninformative these "values" are
==============================================================
dennis roberts, penn state university
educational psychology, 8148632401
http://roberts.ed.psu.edu/users/droberts/drober~1.htm
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=================================================================
