Publications

The increasing emphasis on responsible research assessment has renewed the need for conceptual tools that help communicate the complementary roles of quantitative and qualitative evaluation. This essay proposes an interpretative metaphor that frames bibliometric indicators as the “blood tests” of research systems—heuristic devices that reveal multidimensional aspects of system vitality, balance, and dysfunction. The metaphor, grounded in standard categories of clinical diagnostics (hematological, hepatic, renal, lipidic, and cardiovascular panels), provides an accessible language for scholars and policymakers in research. Each bibliometric technique—ranging from publication and citation counts to patent analysis, altmetrics, and topic modelling—is associated with a diagnostic function such as screening, monitoring, or early risk detection. By linking established principles of responsible metrics (DORA, Leiden Manifesto, Metric Tide, CoARA) with the professionalization of evaluators, the essay situates the metaphor within current debates on bibliometric literacy and the ethical interpretation of indicators. Rather than prescribing metrics or decision rules, the contribution invites reflection on how evaluators can interpret bibliometric signals diagnostically—as contextual evidence for institutional learning, strategic decision-making, and the cultivation of healthy, adaptive research systems. Consistent with the essay format, this contribution does not propose a new evaluative methodology nor empirical validation. Instead, it advances a heuristic and communicative framework intended to emphasize the holistic, contextual, and professionally informed interpretation of quantitative indicators in the evaluation of research activity.

In 2003, as a young lecturer, I saw research as a craft to be learned, not a tally to be scored [...]

Over the past two decades, museums have increasingly experimented with digital technologies to connect with broader contemporary culture. This review article investigates the role crowdsourcing can play in transforming museums into more engaged environments, raising visibility and inclusivity, and involving diverse voices and populations in knowledge-creation processes. Its contribution is to provide an overview of the history, definitions and concepts of crowdsourcing, and examples of crowdsourcing policies and practices that have been adopted by museums. Participation in crowdsourcing has been influenced by gender, education, and socio-economic and cultural background. In the past, historical structures and traditions and infrastructural complexities have stood in the way of wider diversity and inclusivity. As museums move increasingly online, the circulation of information outside the museum’s walls is just as important as the specialist knowledge held within. Museums can play a leading role in public communication by reaching those who constitute the ‘crowd’. This paper explores how museums, through strong collaboration and various forms of crowdsourcing, such as citizen science and participatory engagement, can offer more wide-ranging open access for the sharing and democratisation of knowledge.