ecnaЭкономика наукиEconomics of Science2410-132X2949-4680Delo Publishing houseENKZEGecna-565Research ArticleЭКОНОМИКА ВЫСШЕГО ОБРАЗОВАНИЯECONOMICS OF HIGHER EDUCATIONПочему нам не нужны рейтинги университетовWhy we don’t need university rankingshttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-7890-7532КочетковД. М.KochetkovD. M.

Кочетков Дмитрий Михайлович – кандидат экономических наук, ведущий научный сотрудник, докторант

Scopus Author ID: 57194605735

117218, г. Москва, Нахимовский пр-т, д. 322300 AX, Нидерланды, Лейден, ул. Колффпад, д. 1

Dmitry M. Kochetkov – Candidate of Sciences in Economics, senior researcher  PhD candidate

Scopus Author ID: 57194605735

32, Nakhimovsky Ave., Moscow 1172181 Kolffpad, Leiden 2300 AX, The Netherlands

d.kochetkov@cwts.leidenuniv.nlИнститут проблем развития науки РАН, https://ror.org/05qrfxd25; Центр исследований науки и технологий, Лейденский университет, https://ror.org/027bh9e22Institute for the Study of Science, Russian Academy of Sciences, https://ror.org/05qrfxd25; Centre for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University, https://ror.org/027bh9e2220250510202511397109Copyright © Кочетков Д.М., 20252025Кочетков Д.М.Kochetkov D.M.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://ecna.elpub.ru/jour/article/view/565

Распространение глобальных университетских рейтингов как инструмента оценки научной деятельности требует критического осмысления, учитывая нарастающий объем методологических возражений и замечаний и их потенциально деструктивное влияние на академические системы. Цель настоящего исследования заключается в комплексном анализе присущих рейтингам проблем и оценке актуальных альтернатив в контексте формирования научно-технологической политики. На основе систематического обзора англоязычных и русскоязычных академических и серых источников выявлены устойчивые методологические несовершенства: недостаточная прозрачность алгоритмов расчета, ограниченная применимость библиометрических данных для оценки социально-гуманитарных направлений, субъективность весовых коэффициентов агрегированных индексов, неспособность адекватно отразить качество образовательного процесса и управленческую эффективность. Установлено, что рейтинги, опирающиеся на интегральный показатель, в принципе непригодны для оценки организаций вследствие фундаментальных методологических ограничений; рейтинги без применения интегрального показателя, основанные на прозрачной и воспроизводимой методологии с открытым доступом к исходным данным, могут использоваться для аналитических целей при строгом учете присущих количественным метрикам ограничений. Обоснована целесообразность перехода к моделям оценки, основанным на миссии университета. Значимость работы определяется разработкой научно обоснованной позиции, актуальной для реформирования систем оценки исследований в России и странах БРИКС, и аргументацией в пользу интеграции науковедческих подходов в практику научно-технологического прогнозирования и управления.

The proliferation of global university rankings as a tool for research assessment demands critical examination, given the growing volume of methodological criticism and their potentially detrimental impact on academic systems. The aim of this study is to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the inherent problems of rankings and to evaluate current alternatives within the context of shaping science and technology policy. Based on a systematic review of English- and Russian- language academic and grey sources, persistent methodological shortcomings were identified: insufficient transparency of calculation algorithms, limited applicability of bibliometric data for assessing social sciences and humanities (SSH), subjectivity of weighting coefficients in composite indices, and an inability to adequately reflect the quality of the educational processes and managerial efficiency. It was established that rankings relying on a composite indices are fundamentally unsuitable for evaluating organizations due to inherent methodological limitations; rankings without such a composite indicator, based on transparent and reproducible methodology with open access to source data, can be used analytically provided there is strict consideration of the limitations inherent in quantitative metrics. The expediency of transitioning to mission-driven assessment models was substantiated. The significance of the study lies in developing a scientifically grounded position relevant to reforming research assessment systems in Russia and BRICS countries, and in providing arguments for integrating science of science approaches into the practice of science and technology forecasting and governance.

университетские рейтингиоценка научно-исследовательской деятельностибиблиометрические показателинауковедениенаучно-технологическая политикаuniversity rankingsresearch assessmentbibliometric indicatorsscience of sciencescience and technology policyИсследование подготовлено в рамках темы 1024033100002-8 «Развитие методологических подходов к построению системы мониторинга и оценки результативности научно-технологической, образовательной и инновационной деятельности в Российской Федерации».ReferencesАрефьев, А.Л. (2014). Глобальные университетские рейтинги как новое явление в российской высшей школе. Социологическая наука и социальная практика, 3(07), 5–24.Arefiev, A.L. (2014). Global university rankings as a new phenomenon in Russian higher education. Sociological Science and Social Practice, 3(07), 5–24. (in Russian)Арефьев, А.Л. (2015). Об участии российских вузов в международных рейтингах. Россия реформирующаяся, 13, 213–231. EDN: TOCAEPArefiev, A.L. (2015). On the participation of Russian universities in international rankings. Russia in Reform, 13, 213–231. EDN: TOCAEP (in Russian)Большеротов, А. Л. (2013). Мировой рейтинг университетов: Догнать и перегнать. А нужно ли? Часть I. Рейтинги университетов мира. Жилищное Строительство, 4, 17–23. EDN: QIABWHBolsherotov, A.L. (2013). World university rankings: catch up and overtake. Is it necessary? Part I. World university rankings. Housing Construction, 4, 17–23. EDN: QIABWH (in Russian)Бюллетень Счетной палаты. (2021). 2(279). https://ach.gov.ru/statements/byulleten-schetnoy-palaty-2-279-2021-g (дата обращения: 31.07.2025).Bulletin of the Accounts Chamber. (2021). 2(279). Retrieved July 31, 2025. https://ach.gov.ru/statements/byulleten-schetnoy-palaty-2-279-2021-g (in Russian)Гузикова, Л.А., & Плотникова, Е.В. (2014). Позиции и перспективы участников Проекта 5-100-2020 в международных рейтингах университетов. Вопросы методики преподавания в вузе: ежегодный сборник, 3(17), 15–27. EDN: TBHBSXGuzikova, L.A., & Plotnikova, E.V. (2014). Positions and prospects of the 5-100-2020 project members in international university rankings. Teaching Methodology in Higher Education, 3(17), 15–27. EDN: TBHBSX (in Russian)Кочетков, Д. (2024, ноябрь 12). Нужен ли нам суверенный рейтинг университетов БРИКС. Независимая Газета. http://www.ng.ru/nauka/2024-11-12/15_9133_raiting.html (дата обращения: 31.07.2025).Kochetkov, D. (2024, November 12). Do we need a sovereign ranking of BRICS universities? Nezavisimaya Gazeta. Retrieved July 31, 2025 from http://www.ng.ru/nauka/2024-11-12/15_9133_raiting.html (in Russian)Кочетков, Д.М. (2025). Об истории, предмете и задачах российского науковедения. Социология науки и технологий, 16(1), 91–122. EDN: SSZEDP, https://doi.org/10.24412/2079-0910-2025-1-91-122Kochetkov, D.M. (2025). On the History, Scope, and Tasks of Science Studies in Russia. Sociology of Science and Technology, 16(1), 91–122. EDN: SSZEDP, https://doi.org/10.24412/2079-0910-2025-1-91-122 (in Russian)Кушнева, О.А., Рудская, И.А., & Ферсман, Н.Г. (2014). Мировой рейтинг университетов и программа «5100-2020» Министерства образования и науки РФ как путь повышения конкурентоспособности российских университетов. Общество. Среда. Развитие, 2(31), 17–26. EDN: SGTXKNKushneva, O.A., Rudskaya, I.A., & Fersman, N.G. (2014). World University Rankings and the program “5–100– 2020” of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation as a way to increase the competitiveness of Russian universities. Society. Environment. Development, 2(31), 17–26. EDN: SGTXKN (in Russian)Лазар, М.Г. (2019). Последствия увлечения количественными показателями в науке и высшем образовании. Ученые Записки Российского Государственного Гидрометеорологического Университета, 54, 134–144. EDN: KQSSSJ, https://doi.org/10.33933/2074-2762-2019-54-134-144Lazar, M.G. (2019). Consequences of attraction by quantitative indicators of performance in science and higher education. Proceedings of the Russian State Hydrometeorological University, 54, 134–144. EDN: KQSSSJ, https://doi.org/10.33933/2074-2762-2019-54-134-144 (in Russian)Леонова, Т.Н., Маланичева, Н.В., & Маланичева, А.С. (2017). Международные рейтинги как инструмент оценки конкурентоспособности университетов. Вестник университета, 10, 125–130. EDN: YLQMAQLeonova, T.N., Malanycheva, N.V., & Malanycheva, A.S. (2017). International rankings as a tool for assessing the competitiveness of the Russian universities. Vestnik Universiteta, 10, 125–130. EDN: YLQMAQ (in Russian)Пузатых, А.Н. (2019). Участие в рейтингах университетов мира как определяющий фактор развития на образовательную политику и развитие вузов. Образовательная психология в поликультурном пространстве, 4(48), 105–113. EDN: QKSQMJ, https://doi.org/10.24888/2073-8439-2019-48-4-105-113Puzatykh, A.N. (2019). Participation in world university rankings as a major factor influencing the educational policy of countries and the development of universities. Educational Psychology in Polycultural Space, 4(48), 105–113. EDN: QKSQMJ, https://doi.org/10.24888/2073-8439-2019-48-4-105-113 (in Russian)Пятенко, С.В. (2019). Самостоятельная жизнь рейтингов и результатов образования. Оригинальные исследования, 9(4), 18–28. EDN: ZEKPATPyatenko, S.V. (2019). Independent life of education ratings and results. Original Research, 9(4), 18–28. EDN: ZEKPAT (in Russian)Удалова, Г.П. (2011). Доминирование – Лидерство у приматов (эволюционный аспект). Теория и методология в архаике. Лидерство в архаике: условия и формы правления, с. 25–49. EDN: SNDHYTUdalova, G.P. (2011). Dominance vs. leadership in primates (evolutionary aspect). In Theory and Methodology in Archaics. Leadership in Archaics: Conditions and Forms of Governance (pp. 25–49). EDN: SNDHYT (in Russian)Эскиндаров, М.А. (2022). В России нужно развивать свой внутренний университетский рейтинг. Ректор вуза, 4, 42–47. EDN: HIAESAEskindarov, M.A. (2022). Russia needs to develop its own internal university ranking. University Rector, 4, 42–47. EDN: HIAESA (in Russian)Abramo, G. (2017). Bibliometric evaluation of research performance: Where do we stand? Voprosy Obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, (1), 112–127. EDN: YHZCSX, https://doi.org/10.17323/1814-9545-2017-1-112-127Abramo, G. (2017). Bibliometric evaluation of research performance: Where do we stand? Voprosy Obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, (1), 112–127. EDN: YHZCSX, https://doi.org/10.17323/1814-9545-2017-1-112-127Bellantuono, L., Monaco, A., Amoroso, N., Aquaro, V., Bardoscia, M., Loiotile, A.D., Lombardi, A., Tangaro, S., & Bellotti, R. (2022). Territorial bias in university rankings: A complex network approach. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 1–16. EDN: DYITQA, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-08859-wBellantuono, L., Monaco, A., Amoroso, N., Aquaro, V., Bardoscia, M., Loiotile, A.D., Lombardi, A., Tangaro, S., & Bellotti, R. (2022). Territorial bias in university rankings: A complex network approach. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 1–16. EDN: DYITQA, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-08859-wBillaut, J.-C., Bouyssou, D., & Vincke, P. (2010). Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking? Scientometrics, 84(1), 237–263. EDN: POHVSJ, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0115-xBillaut, J.-C., Bouyssou, D., & Vincke, P. (2010). Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking? Scientometrics, 84(1), 237–263. EDN: POHVSJ, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0115-xBrent, T. (2023, October 12). Utrecht University withdraws from global ranking as debate on quantitative metrics grows. Science|Business. Retrieved July 31, 2025 from https://sciencebusiness.net/news/universities/utrecht-university-withdraws-global-ranking-debate-quantitative-metrics-growsBrent, T. (2023, October 12). Utrecht University withdraws from global ranking as debate on quantitative metrics grows. Science|Business. Retrieved July 31, 2025 from https://sciencebusiness.net/news/universities/utrecht-university-withdraws-global-ranking-debate-quantitative-metrics-growsCastillo, E. (2023, June 8). These Colleges Dropped Out of U. S. News Rankings | BestColleges. BestColleges. Retrieved July 31, 2025 from https://www.bestcolleges.com/news/these-schools-dropped-out-of-us-news-rankings/Castillo, E. (2023, June 8). These Colleges Dropped Out of U. S. News Rankings | BestColleges. BestColleges. Retrieved July 31, 2025 from https://www.bestcolleges.com/news/these-schools-dropped-out-of-us-news-rankings/Dimzov, S., Matošić, M., & Urem, I. (2021). University rankings and institutional affiliations: Role of academic librarians. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 47(5). EDN: SKMMPH, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acal-ib.2021.102387Dimzov, S., Matošić, M., & Urem, I. (2021). University rankings and institutional affiliations: Role of academic librarians. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 47(5). EDN: SKMMPH, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acal-ib.2021.102387Docampo, D. (2011). On using the Shanghai ranking to assess the research performance of university systems. Scientometrics, 86(1), 77–92. EDN: EFEQST, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0280-yDocampo, D. (2011). On using the Shanghai ranking to assess the research performance of university systems. Scientometrics, 86(1), 77–92. EDN: EFEQST, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0280-yDocampo, D., & Cram, L. (2014). On the internal dynamics of the Shanghai ranking. Scientometrics, 98(2), 1347–1366. EDN: XYPUBP, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1143-0Docampo, D., & Cram, L. (2014). On the internal dynamics of the Shanghai ranking. Scientometrics, 98(2), 1347–1366. EDN: XYPUBP, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1143-0Espeland, W.N., & Sauder, M. (2016). Engines of Anxiety: Academic Rankings, Reputation, and Accountability. Russel Sage Foundation.Espeland, W.N., & Sauder, M. (2016). Engines of Anxiety: Academic Rankings, Reputation, and Accountability. Russel Sage Foundation.Fauzi, M.A., Tan, C.N., Mukhtar, M., & Awalludin, N. (2020). University rankings: A review of methodological flaws implications of university rankings. Issues in Educational Research, 30(1), 79–96. EDN: NDFLCGFauzi, M.A., Tan, C.N., Mukhtar, M., & Awalludin, N. (2020). University rankings: A review of methodological flaws implications of university rankings. Issues in Educational Research, 30(1), 79–96. EDN: NDFLCGGao, X. (Andy), & Zheng, Y. (2020). ‘Heavy mountains’ for Chinese humanities and social science academics in the quest for world-class universities. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 50(4), 554–572. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2018.1538770Gao, X. (Andy), & Zheng, Y. (2020). ‘Heavy mountains’ for Chinese humanities and social science academics in the quest for world-class universities. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 50(4), 554–572. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2018.1538770Hazelkorn, E., Loukkola, T., & Zhang, T. (2014). Rankings in Institutional Strategies and Processes: Impact or Illusion?Hazelkorn, E., Loukkola, T., & Zhang, T. (2014). Rankings in Institutional Strategies and Processes: Impact or Illusion?Holmes, R. (2024, April 27). ‘THE’ rankings: What happens to universities that leave? University World News. Retrieved July 31, 2025 from https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20240423081048420Holmes, R. (2024, April 27). ‘THE’ rankings: What happens to universities that leave? University World News. Retrieved July 31, 2025 from https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20240423081048420Huang, C.K., Neylon, C., Brookes-Kenworthy, C., Hosking, R., Montgomery, L., Wilson, K., & Ozaygen, A. (2020). Comparison of bibliographic data sources: Implications for the robustness of university rankings. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(2), 445–478. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00031Huang, C.K., Neylon, C., Brookes-Kenworthy, C., Hosking, R., Montgomery, L., Wilson, K., & Ozaygen, A. (2020). Comparison of bibliographic data sources: Implications for the robustness of university rankings. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(2), 445–478. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00031Huang, M.H. (2012). Opening the black box of QS world university rankings. Research Evaluation, 21(1), 71–78. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvr003Huang, M.H. (2012). Opening the black box of QS world university rankings. Research Evaluation, 21(1), 71–78. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvr003Iesbik Valmorbida, S.M., Rolim Ensslin, S.P., Ensslin, L., & Ripoll-Feliu, V.M. (2016). Rankings universitários mundiais. Que dizem os estudos internacionais? REICE. Revista Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en Educación, 14(2), 5–29. https://doi.org/10.15366/reice2016.14.2.001Iesbik Valmorbida, S.M., Rolim Ensslin, S.P., Ensslin, L., & Ripoll-Feliu, V.M. (2016). Rankings universitários mundiais. Que dizem os estudos internacionais? REICE. Revista Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en Educación, 14(2), 5–29. https://doi.org/10.15366/reice2016.14.2.001INORMS Research Evaluation Working Group. (2022). Fair and responsible university assessment: Application to the global university rankings and beyond.INORMS Research Evaluation Working Group. (2022). Fair and responsible university assessment: Application to the global university rankings and beyond.Ioannidis, J.P.A., Patsopoulos, N.A., Kavvoura, F.K., Tatsioni, A., Evangelou, E., Kouri, I., Contopoulos-Ioannidis, D.G., & Liberopoulos, G. (2007). International ranking systems for universities and institutions: A critical appraisal. BMC Medicine, 5, 1–9. EDN: TBAGHW, https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-5-30Ioannidis, J.P.A., Patsopoulos, N.A., Kavvoura, F.K., Tatsioni, A., Evangelou, E., Kouri, I., Contopoulos-Ioannidis, D.G., & Liberopoulos, G. (2007). International ranking systems for universities and institutions: A critical appraisal. BMC Medicine, 5, 1–9. EDN: TBAGHW, https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-5-30Klumpp, M. (2019). Sisyphus revisited: Efficiency developments in european universities 2011-2016 according to ranking and budget data. Review of Higher Education, 43(1), 169–219. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2019.0094Klumpp, M. (2019). Sisyphus revisited: Efficiency developments in european universities 2011-2016 according to ranking and budget data. Review of Higher Education, 43(1), 169–219. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2019.0094Kochetkov, D. (2023). Review of the Russian-language academic literature on university rankings and a global perspective. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1), 576. EDN: VVEUKZ, https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02082-2Kochetkov, D. (2023). Review of the Russian-language academic literature on university rankings and a global perspective. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1), 576. EDN: VVEUKZ, https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02082-2Kochetkov, D. (2024). University rankings in the context of research evaluation: A state-of-the-art review. Quantitative Science Studies, 5(3), 533–555. EDN: CFFFED, https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00317Kochetkov, D. (2024). University rankings in the context of research evaluation: A state-of-the-art review. Quantitative Science Studies, 5(3), 533–555. EDN: CFFFED, https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00317Krauskopf, E. (2021). The Shanghai global ranking of academic subjects: Room for improvement. Profesional de la Informacion, 30(4), 1–13. EDN: LHHULR, https://doi.org/10.3145/EPI.2021.JUL.08Krauskopf, E. (2021). The Shanghai global ranking of academic subjects: Room for improvement. Profesional de la Informacion, 30(4), 1–13. EDN: LHHULR, https://doi.org/10.3145/EPI.2021.JUL.08Li, J. (2016). The Global Ranking Regime and the Reconfiguration of Higher Education: Comparative Case Studies on Research Assessment Exercises in China, Hong Kong, and Japan. Higher Education Policy, 29(4), 473–493. EDN: OXDUNN, https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-016-0015-7Li, J. (2016). The Global Ranking Regime and the Reconfiguration of Higher Education: Comparative Case Studies on Research Assessment Exercises in China, Hong Kong, and Japan. Higher Education Policy, 29(4), 473–493. EDN: OXDUNN, https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-016-0015-7Loukkola, T., Peterbauer, H., & Gover, A. (2020). Exploring Higher Education Indicators (May).Loukkola, T., Peterbauer, H., & Gover, A. (2020). Exploring Higher Education Indicators (May).Merton, R.K. (1968). The Matthew Effect in Science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered. Science, 159(3810), 56–63. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.159.3810.56Merton, R.K. (1968). The Matthew Effect in Science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered. Science, 159(3810), 56–63. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.159.3810.56Pakkan, S., Sudhakar, C., Tripathi, S., & Rao, M. (2021). Quest for ranking excellence: Impact study of research metrics. DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology, 41(1), 61–69. EDN: NREHBW, https://doi.org/10.14429/djlit.41.1.16328Pakkan, S., Sudhakar, C., Tripathi, S., & Rao, M. (2021). Quest for ranking excellence: Impact study of research metrics. DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology, 41(1), 61–69. EDN: NREHBW, https://doi.org/10.14429/djlit.41.1.16328Pandiella-Dominique, A., Moreno-Lorente, L., García-Zorita, C., & Sanz-Casado, E. (2018). Model for estimating Academic Ranking of World Universities (Shanghai Ranking) scores. Revista Espanola de Documentacion Cientifica, 41(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2018.2.1462Pandiella-Dominique, A., Moreno-Lorente, L., García-Zorita, C., & Sanz-Casado, E. (2018). Model for estimating Academic Ranking of World Universities (Shanghai Ranking) scores. Revista Espanola de Documentacion Cientifica, 41(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2018.2.1462Safón, V. (2013). What do global university rankings really measure? The search for the X factor and the X entity. Scientometrics, 97(2), 223–244. EDN: KQTOQM, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-0986-8Safón, V. (2013). What do global university rankings really measure? The search for the X factor and the X entity. Scientometrics, 97(2), 223–244. EDN: KQTOQM, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-0986-8Safón, V., & Docampo, D. (2020). Analyzing the impact of reputational bias on global university rankings based on objective research performance data: The case of the Shanghai Ranking (ARWU). Scientometrics, 125(3), 2199–2227. EDN: CCCEFV, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03722-zSafón, V., & Docampo, D. (2020). Analyzing the impact of reputational bias on global university rankings based on objective research performance data: The case of the Shanghai Ranking (ARWU). Scientometrics, 125(3), 2199–2227. EDN: CCCEFV, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03722-zSharma, Y. (2022, may 11). Three major universities quit international rankings. University World News. Retrieved July 31, 2025 from https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20220511170923665Sharma, Y. (2022, may 11). Three major universities quit international rankings. University World News. Retrieved July 31, 2025 from https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20220511170923665Shreeve, R.L. (2020). Globalisation or westernisation? The influence of global university rankings in the context of the Republic of China (Taiwan). Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 50(6), 922–927. EDN: SNHYPJ, https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2020.1736403Shreeve, R.L. (2020). Globalisation or westernisation? The influence of global university rankings in the context of the Republic of China (Taiwan). Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 50(6), 922–927. EDN: SNHYPJ, https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2020.1736403Soldani, J. (2019). Grey Literature: A Safe Bridge Between Academy and Industry? ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 44(3), 11–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3356773.3356776Soldani, J. (2019). Grey Literature: A Safe Bridge Between Academy and Industry? ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 44(3), 11–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3356773.3356776Tuesta, E.F., Bolaños-Pizarro, M., Neves, D.P., Fernández, G., & Axel-Berg, J. (2020). Complex networks for benchmarking in global universities rankings. Scientometrics, 125(1), 405–425. EDN: RZWNPT, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03637-9Tuesta, E.F., Bolaños-Pizarro, M., Neves, D.P., Fernández, G., & Axel-Berg, J. (2020). Complex networks for benchmarking in global universities rankings. Scientometrics, 125(1), 405–425. EDN: RZWNPT, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03637-9van Raan, A.F.J. (2005). Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods. Scientometrics, 62(1), 133–143. EDN: YCSIYP, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0008-6van Raan, A.F.J. (2005). Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods. Scientometrics, 62(1), 133–143. EDN: YCSIYP, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0008-6van Raan, A.F.J., van Leeuwen, T.N., & Visser, M.S. (2011). Severe language effect in university rankings: Particularly Germany and France are wronged in citation-based rankings. Scientometrics, 88(2), 495–498. EDN: PCAVSO, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0382-1van Raan, A.F.J., van Leeuwen, T.N., & Visser, M.S. (2011). Severe language effect in university rankings: Particularly Germany and France are wronged in citation-based rankings. Scientometrics, 88(2), 495–498. EDN: PCAVSO, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0382-1Vernon, M.M., Andrew Balas, E., & Momani, S. (2018). Are university rankings useful to improve research? A systematic review. PLoS ONE, 13(3), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193762Vernon, M.M., Andrew Balas, E., & Momani, S. (2018). Are university rankings useful to improve research? A systematic review. PLoS ONE, 13(3), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193762Waltman, L.R., Wouters, P., & van Eck, N.J. (2017, may). Ten principles for the responsible use of university rankings. CWTS Blog. Retrieved July 31, 2025 from https://www.cwts.nl/blog?article=n-r2q274Waltman, L.R., Wouters, P., & van Eck, N.J. (2017, may). Ten principles for the responsible use of university rankings. CWTS Blog. Retrieved July 31, 2025 from https://www.cwts.nl/blog?article=n-r2q274

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.