MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3080847403 · doi:10.3145/epi.2020.jul.41

Dirección de tesis doctorales como reflejo de la Biblioteconomía y Documentación académica española: actores y temas

2020· article· en· W3080847403 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gregorio González‐Alcaide, Aurora González‐Teruel

Bibliographic record

VenueEl Profesional de la Informacion · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAdvertising and Communication Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLibrary sciencePublishingSociologySubject (documents)Civil servantsQuarter (Canadian coin)Consolidation (business)Political scienceGeographyBusinessPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Doctoral dissertations enable the transfer of research skills and capacities to future generations and the consolidation of lines of research in a given area of knowledge. The field of Library and Information Science in public universities in Spain is characterized by the supervision of doctoral theses by academics in the area. We identified active professors during the 2019–2020 academic year, their date of appointment as civil servants within the public university system, the dissertations that they supervised, and their participation in papers published in scientific journals. The analysis included 644 theses. About a quarter (23%) of university faculty have never supervised a doctoral thesis, and most faculty members and tenured professors (60%) show a lower than average rate of adviserships per year since their academic appointment. There is a high concentration of PhD advisers in just a few institutions and academics (8% of university professors have supervised 42% of the dissertations), with an important gender imbalance: women supervised an average of 1.8 dissertations, compared with 2.6 for men. Information units and services, study metrics and scientific publications, and information sources are the topics of 47% of the dissertations. Many of the professors with 10 or more adviserships (n/N = 12/18) lack a subject area specialization, and their role in PhD supervision was not related to their participation in research activities oriented toward publishing in scientific journals. Our results suggest that considering supervision of doctoral theses as an important academic merit could contribute to a further concentration of power and social capital among a small group of advisers. This phenomenon could reduce the plurality of topics addressed and favor suboptimal adviserships. The imbalances described emerge as another threat, exacerbating the epistemological crisis in the discipline and in the university studies in this area of knowledge. Resumen Las tesis doctorales posibilitan la transmisión de la capacidad investigadora a las futuras generaciones y la consolidación de las líneas de investigación de un área de conocimiento. Se caracteriza la Biblioteconomía y Documentación de las universidades públicas españolas a partir de la dirección de tesis doctorales por los académicos del área. Se han identificado los docentes activos en el curso 2019-2020, su fecha de nombramiento como funcionarios, las tesis que han dirigido y su participación en publicaciones en revistas científicas. Se han analizado 644 tesis. Un 23% de los titulares de universidad nunca ha participado en la dirección de tesis y la mayoría de los titulares y catedráticos de universidad (60%) tienen un promedio de direcciones/año desde su nombramiento por debajo de la media del área. Existe una elevada concentración en unas pocas instituciones y directores (el 8% del profesorado ha dirigido el 42% de las tesis), con importantes desequilibrios en la participación de las mujeres (promedio de 1,8 tesis dirigidas frente a 2,6 en el caso de los hombres). Unidades y servicios de información, estudios métricos de la publicación científica y fuentes de información son los temas del 47% de las tesis. Muchos de los docentes con 10 o más direcciones (n=18) adolecen de una especialización temática, no existiendo una relación entre su relevante papel en las tareas de dirección y su participación en las actividades de investigación a través de publicaciones en revistas científicas. Los resultados alertan acerca de que la consideración de la dirección de tesis como un importante mérito curricular puede contribuir a reforzar el fenómeno de la concentración del poder y capital social en un reducido grupo de directores, provocando una reducción de la pluralidad de enfoques y direcciones menos eficientes. Los desequilibrios descritos se erigen como una amenaza más que se suma a la crisis epistemológica y de los estudios universitarios de esta área de conocimiento.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0110.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.382 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEl Profesional de la InformacionSame topicAdvertising and Communication StudiesFrench-language works237,207