Not All That Glitters is on the Whitelist

The study examines the potential impact of established rules in the methodology for calculating the composite score of publication performance (KBPR) on the research incentives of scholars working in the field of economic sciences. In particular, taking into account the «two discourses» of Russian economic science and the dual nature of the reproduction of new economic knowledge, shortcomings in the proposed binary differentiation of humanities and social sciences publications within the methodology have been identified in the context of assessing the scientific productivity of economists. The existing flaws of the scientometric approach to selecting scientific journals for national lists have been revealed, which serve as limitations to a comprehensive accounting of the publication activity of Russian economists. The need to develop a balanced system for managing the publication activities of economists is substantiated. International experience in compiling priority-oriented disciplinary lists of scientific publications is reviewed. A potential adjustment to the approaches for evaluating the scientific work of economists is proposed, reflecting the substantive aspect of published research, which involves the use of scientometric tools as an auxiliary factor.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Issues of Economic Theory
Published
2025-08-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.52342/2587-7666vte_2025_3_105_118
Primary Topic
Economic Development and Digital Transformation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Not All That Glitters is on the Whitelist

Anastasia Zyubina
Issues of Economic Theory
Economic Development and Digital Transformation
article

Not All That Glitters is on the Whitelist

Anastasia Zyubina
article en

Abstract

The study examines the potential impact of established rules in the methodology for calculating the composite score of publication performance (KBPR) on the research incentives of scholars working in the field of economic sciences. In particular, taking into account the «two discourses» of Russian economic science and the dual nature of the reproduction of new economic knowledge, shortcomings in the proposed binary differentiation of humanities and social sciences publications within the methodology have been identified in the context of assessing the scientific productivity of economists. The existing flaws of the scientometric approach to selecting scientific journals for national lists have been revealed, which serve as limitations to a comprehensive accounting of the publication activity of Russian economists. The need to develop a balanced system for managing the publication activities of economists is substantiated. International experience in compiling priority-oriented disciplinary lists of scientific publications is reviewed. A potential adjustment to the approaches for evaluating the scientific work of economists is proposed, reflecting the substantive aspect of published research, which involves the use of scientometric tools as an auxiliary factor.

Issues of Economic TheoryVol. 28(3)
Decent work and economic growth
Openalex Percentile: Top 66%
Economic Development and Digital Transformation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.