Abstract

Objective

Scrutinize how the three main sources of knowledge inequalities, namely, gender, age, and education, relate to the content, format, and object of the survey items used to measure knowledge

Methods

Using a pooled data set encompassing 106 postelection surveys in 47 countries from the CSES, we perform analyses by stacking the data at the question level.

Results

Abstract. To what extent does conventional survey measurement capture the political interest of men and women equally well? We aim to answer this question by relying on unique data from a national online survey in Spain, where we used various questions unpacking the standard indicator of political interest. The findings show that men and women nominate different personal political interests. We also find that the gender gap in political interest vanishes once these specific interests are taken into account.

Abstract. We present a set of studies the objective of which was to test the robustness of the acknowledgment of earned entitlement effect across different experimental modes and populations. We present three sets of results. The first is derived from a between-subject analysis of two independent, but comparable samples of nonstudent adults. One sample participated in a standard, behavioral laboratory experiment and the other participated in a survey experiment. The two methods returned similar treatment effects.

Abstract. Responsible indicators are crucial for research assessment and monitoring. Transparency and accuracy of indicators are required to make research assessment fair and ensure reproducibility. However, sometimes it is difficult to conduct or replicate studies based on indicators due to the lack of transparency in conceptualization and operationalization. In this paper, we review the different variants of the Probabilistic Affinity Index (PAI), considering both the conceptual and empirical underpinnings.

Abstract. This paper presents a large-scale document-level comparison of two major bibliographic data sources: Scopus and Dimensions. The focus is on the differences in their coverage of documents at two levels of aggregation: by country and by institution. The main goal is to analyze whether Dimensions offers as good new opportunities for bibliometric analysis at the country and institutional levels as it does at the global level. Differences in the completeness and accuracy of citation links are also studied.