Aagaard K., Kladakis A. et Nielsen M. W., 2020, « Concentration or dispersal of research funding ? », Quantitative Science Studies », 1 (1), p.117-149. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00002
Aghion P. et Cohen É., 2004, Éducation et croissance. Rapport, Paris, La Documentation française.
Anonyme, 2010, « The ratings game », Nature, 464 (7285), p. 7-8. https://doi.org/10.1038/464007b
Arfaoui M., 2019, « Creative Europe » ou l’action publique par projet. Enquête sur une modernisation des politiques publiques en Europe, thèse de doctorat en sociologie, Paris, École des hautes études en sciences sociales.
Audier S., 2019, L’Âge productiviste. Hégémonie prométhéenne, brèches et alternatives écologiques, Paris, Éd. La Découverte
Auranen O. et Nieminen M., 2010, « University research funding and publication performance, an international comparison », Research policy, 39 (6), p.822-834. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.03.003
Australian Government, 2021, Investigator Grants 2020 Outcomes Factsheet, National Health and Medical Research Council. https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/attachments/grantdocuments/investigator_grants_2020_outcomes_factsheet.pdf
Avin S., 2015, « Funding science by lottery », Recent developments in the philosophy of science. EPSA13 Helsinki, p. 111-126. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23015-3_9
Ayoubi C., Pezzoni M. et Visentin F., 2019, « The important thing is not to win, it is to take part. What if scientists benefit from participating in research grant competitions ? », Research Policy, 48 (1), p. 84-97. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.07.021
Azoulay P., 2012, « Turn the scientific method on ourselves », Nature, 484 (7392), p. 31-32. https://doi.org/10.1038/484031a
Banal-Estañol A., Macho-Stadler I. et Pérez-Castrillo D., 2019, « Evaluation in research funding agencies. Are structurally diverse teams biased against ? » Research Policy, 48 (7), p. 1823-1840. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2019.04.008
Barats C., 2019, « Médiatisation et usages socio-discursifs du “classement de Shanghai” », Revue française d’administration publique, 169, p. 101-120. https://doi.org/10.3917/rfap.169.0101
Barnett A. G., Graves N., Clarke P. et Herbert D., 2015, « The impact of a streamlined funding application process on application time: two cross-sectional surveys of Australian researchers », BMJ Open, 5 (1). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006912
Baxt W. G., Waeckerle J. F., Berlin J. A. et Callaham M. L., 1998, « Who reviews the reviewers ? feasibility of using a fictitious manuscript to evaluate peer reviewer performance », Annals of emergency medicine, 32 (3), p.310-317. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0196-0644(98)70006-x
Biagioli M. et Lippman A., 2020, Gaming the Metrics. Misconduct and Manipulation in Academic Research, Cambridge, MIT Press.
Bol T., de Vaan M. et van de Rijt A., 2018, « The Matthew effect in science funding », Proceedigs of the National Academy of Sciences, 115 (19), p. 4887-4890. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1719557115
Bollen J., Crandall D., Junk D., Ding Y. et Börner K., 2017, « An efficient system to fund science. From proposal review to peer-to-peer distributions », Scientometrics, 110 (1), p. 521-528. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2110-3
Bornmann L., Mutz R. et Daniel H.-D., 2010, « A reliability-generalization study of journal peer reviews. A multilevel meta-analysis of inter-rater reliability and its determinants », PloS One, 5 (12). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0014331
Borsboom D., 2006, « The attack of the psychometricians », Psychometrika, 71 (3), p. 425- 440. https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs11336-006-1447-6
Chamayou G., 2009, « Petits conseils aux enseignants-chercheurs qui voudront réussir leur évaluation », Contretemps, p. 208-226. http://www.contretemps.eu/petits-conseils-enseignants-chercheurs-qui-voudront-reussir-leur-evaluation/
Chaudret B., 2013, « Où en est la recherche française ? », La Pensée, 376, p. 57-68. https://doi.org/10.3917/lp.376.0057
Chawla D. S., 2018, « What’s wrong with the journal impact factor in 5 graphs », Nature Index, 3 avr. https://www.nature.com/nature-index/news-blog/whats-wrong-with-the-jif-in-five-graphs
Chawla D. S., 2021, « Scientists at odds on Utrecht University reforms to hiring and promotion criteria », Nature Index, 9 août. https://www.nature.com/nature-index/news-blog/scientists-argue-over-use-of-impact-factors-for-evaluating-research
Collectif, 2012, San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment. Putting Science into the Assessment of Research (DORA), American Society for Cell Biology. https://sfdora.org/read/
Cortes C. et Lawrence N. D., 2021, « Inconsistency in conference peer review. Revisiting the 2014 NeurIPS experiment », Arxiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2109.09774
Crowden G., 1930, « Industrial efficiency and fatigue », Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, 23, p. 479-486. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2182931/
Demetrescu C., Finocchi I., Ribichini A. et Schaerf M., 2020, « On bibliometrics in academic promotions. A case study in computer science and engineering in Italy », Scientometrics, 124 (3), p. 2207-2228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03548-9
Dericquebourg R., 2001, « Mystagogie et religions de guérison. Max Weber revisité », Archives de sciences sociales des religions, 113, p. 149-158. https://doi.org/10.4000/assr.20196
Desailly-Chanson M.-A., Penaud M., Vilboeuf L., Elshoud S. et Piozin E., 2022, Contrôle de l’IHU méditerranée infection, rapport définitif, Inspection générale des affaires sociales. https://www.igas.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/rapport_ihu_definitif_tome_1_.pdf
Dougherty M. R. et Horne Z., 2022, « Citation counts and journal impact factors do not capture some indicators of research quality in the behavioural and brain sciences », Royal Society Open Science, 9 (8). https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.220334
Ebadi A. et Schiffauerova A., 2016, « How to boost scientific production ? A statistical analysis of research funding and other influencing factors », Scientometrics, 106 (3), p. 1093-1116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1825-x
Fire M. et Guestrin C., 2019, « Over-optimization of academic publishing metrics. Observing Goodhart’s law in action », GigaScience, 8 (6). https://doi.org/10.1093/gigascience/giz053
Franzoni C., Scellato G. et Stephan P., 2011, « Changing incentives to publish » Science, 333 (6043), p. 702-703. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1197286
Garcia-Costa D., Squazzoni F., Mehmani B. et Grimaldo F., 2022, « Measuring the developmental function of peer review. A multi-dimensional, cross-disciplinary analysis of peer review reports from 740 academic journals », PeerJ, 10. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.13539
Griesemer J., 2020, « Taking Goodhart’s Law Meta: Gaming, Meta-Gaming, and Hacking Academic Performance Metrics », dans M. Biagioli et A. Lippman (éds), Gaming the Metrics. Misconduct and Manipulation in Academic Research, Cambridge, MIT Press, p. 77-87.
Gross K. et Bergstrom C. T., 2019, « Contest models highlight inherent inefficiencies of scientific funding competitions », Plos Biology, 17 (1). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000065
Hennessey B. A. et Amabile T. M., 2010, « Creativity », Annual Review of Psychology, 61, p. 569-598. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100416
Herbert D. L., Barnett A. G., Clarke P. et Graves N., 2013, « On the time spent preparing grant proposals. An observational study of Australian researchers », BMJ Open, 3 (5). http://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002800
Herbert D. L., Coveney J., Clarke P., Graves N. et Barnett A. G., 2014, « The impact of funding deadlines on personal workloads, stress and family relationships. A qualitative study of Australian researchers », BMJ Open, 4 (3). http://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004462
Herbert D. L., Graves N., Clarke P. et Barnett A. G., 2015, « Using simplified peer review processes to fund research. A prospective study », BMJ Open, 5 (7). http://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008380
Jacob B. A. et Lefgren L., 2011, « The impact of research grant funding on scientific productivity », Research Policy, 41 (2), p. 1168-1177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2011.05.005
Larivière V. et Gingras Y., 2010, « The impact factor’s Matthew effect. A natural experiment in bibliometric s », Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61 (2), p. 424-427. http://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21232
Larregue J. et Saint-Martin A., 2019, « Troubles dans l’ethos scientifique », Zilsel, 6, p. 149-163. https://doi.org/10.3917/zil.006.0149
Laudel G., 2006, « The art of getting funded. How scientists adapt to their funding conditions », Science and Public Policy, 33 (7), p. 489-504. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154306781778777
Lauer M. S., Danthi N. S., Kaltman J. et Wu C., 2015, « Predicting productivity returns on investment. Thirty years of peer review, grant funding, and publication of highly cited papers at the national heart, lung, and blood institute », Circulation Research, 117 (3), p. 239-243. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.115.306830
Liu M., Choy V., Clarke P., Barnett A., Blakely T. et Pomeroy L., 2020, « The acceptability of using a lottery to allocate research funding. A survey of applicants », Research Integrity and Peer review, 5 (1), p. 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-019-0089-z
Madsen E. B. et Aagaard K., 2020, « Concentration of danish research funding on individual researchers and research topics. Patterns and potential drivers », Quantitative Science Studies, 1 (3), p. 1159-1181. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00077
Maisonneuve H., Plaud B. et Caumes E., 2020, « Pandémie à Sars-COV-2 : éthique et intégrité oubliées devant la précipitation pour publier », La Presse médicale. Formation, 1 (6), p. 572-581. https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.lpmfor.2020.10.021
McKiernan E. C., Schimanski L. A., Nieves C. M., Matthias L., Niles M. T. et Alperin J. P., 2019, « Meta-research. Use of the journal impact factor in academic review, promotion, and tenure evaluations », Elife, 8. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.47338
Mondello G., 2022, « Construction de systèmes de croyances et controverses autour du Covid-19 », Revue d’économie politique, 132 (1), p. 79-111. https://doi.org/10.3917/redp.321.0085
Mongeon P., Brodeur C., Beaudry C. et Larivière V., 2016, « Concentration of research funding leads to decreasing marginal returns », Research Evaluation, 25 (4), p. 396-404. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvw007
Mullard A., 2021, « Half of top cancer studies fail high-profile reproducibility effort », Nature, 600 (7889), p. 368-369. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-03691-0
Muller S. M., 2017, « Academics as rent seekers. Distorted incentives in higher education, with reference to the south african case », International Journal of Educational Development, 52, p. 58-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2016.11.004
National Science Board., 2014, Reducing investigators’ administrative workload for federally funded research, National Science Foundation. https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2014/nsb1418/nsb1418.pdf
Obadia L., 2021, « Urgence de la recherche, recherche en urgence. Covid-19 et au-delà… », Questions de communication, 40, p. 213-232. https://doi.org/10.4000/questionsdecommunication.26968
Okazaki E., Nishi D., Susukida R., Inoue A., Shimazu A. et Tsutsumi A., 2019, « Association between working hours, work engagement, and work productivity in employees. A cross-sectional study of the japanese study of health, occupation, and psychosocial factors relates equity », Journal of Occupational Health, 61 (2), p. 182-188. https://doi.org/10.1002%2F1348-9585.12023
Pang A. S.-K., 2016, Rest. Why You Get More Done When You Work Less, New York, Basic Books.
Park S. et Berry F., 2014, « Successful diffusion of a failed policy. The case of pay-for-performance in the us federal government », Public Management Review, 16 (6), p. 763-781. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2012.750835
Patience G. S., Patience C. A., Blais B. et Bertrand F., 2017, « Citation analysis of scientific categories ». Heliyon, 3 (5). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2017.e00300
Pfeffer J., 2001, « What’s wrong with management practices in Silicon Valley ? A lot. To prevent high turnover, burnout and loss of employee commitment, learn to avoid four practices that are undermining some high-profile companies », MIT Sloan Management Review, 42 (3), p. 101-103. https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/whats-wrong-with-management-practices-in-silicon-valley-a-lot/
Pfeffer J., 2018, « Work hours and health. A comment on “beyond nine to five” », Academy of Management Discoveries, 4 (1), p. 94-96. https://doi.org/10.5465/amd.2017.0120
Pickstone J. V., 2001, Ways of Knowing. A New History of Science, Technology, and Medicine, Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
Pier E. L., Brauer M., Filut A., Kaatz A., Raclaw J., Nathan M. J. et Carnes M., 2018, « Low agreement among reviewers evaluating the same NIH grant applications », Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115 (12), p. 2952-2957. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1714379115
Piller C., 2022, « Blots on a field ? », Science, 377 (6604), p. 358-363. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.ade0209
Quan W., Chen B. et Shu F., 2017, « Publish or impoverish. An investigation of the monetary reward system of science in China (1999-2016) », Aslib Journal of Information Management, 69 (5), p. 486-502. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-01-2017-0014
Reymert I., 2021, « Bibliometrics in academic recruitment. A screening tool rather than a game changer », Minerva, 59, p. 53-78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-020-09419-0
Reymert I., Jungblut J. et Borlaug S. B., 2021, « Are evaluative cultures national or global ? a cross-national study on evaluative cultures in academic recruitment processes in Europe », Higher Education, 82 (5), p. 823-843. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00659-3
Rival M. et Ruano-Borbalan J.-C., 2017, « La fabrique des politiques publiques co-construites : idéologie et pratiques innovantes », Politiques et management public, 34 (1-2), p. 5-16. https://journals.openedition.org/pmp/11013
Rodamar J., 2018, « There ought to be a law! Campbell versus Goodhart », Significance, 15 (6), p. 9-9. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-9713.2018.01205.x
Rodgers P. et Collings A., 2021, « Reproducibility in cancer biology. What have we learned ? », Elife, 10. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.75830
Roebber P. J. et Schultz D. M., 2011, « Peer review, program officers and science funding », Plos One, 6 (4). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0018680
Roumbanis L., 2019, « Peer review or lottery ? A critical analysis of two different forms of decision-making mechanisms for allocation of research grants », Science, Technology, & Human Values, 44 (6), p. 994-1019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0162243918822744
Sïle L. et Vanderstraeten R., 2019, « Measuring changes in publication patterns in a context of performance-based research funding systems. The case of educational research in the University of Gothenburg (2005-2014) », Scientometrics, 118 (1), p. 71-91. https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v118y2019i1d10.1007_s11192-018-2963-8.html
Stephan P., Veugelers R. et Wang J., 2017, « Reviewers are blinkered by bibliometrics », Nature, 544 (7651), p. 411-412. https://doi.org/10.1038/544411a
Stewart M., 2018, « State crime by proxy : Corporate influence on state sanctioned social harm », Journal of Critical Psychology, Counselling and Psychotherapy, 18, p. 217-227. https://www.egalitarianpublishing.com/JCPCP/2018/JCPCP_v18_i04_Abs_Stewart.pdf
Taffe M. A. et Gilpin N. W., 2021, « Equity, diversity and inclusion. Racial inequity in grant funding from the us national institutes of health », Elife, 10, https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.65697
Teixeira da Silva J. A. et Dobránszki J., 2017, « Highly cited retracted papers », Scientometrics, 110 (3), p. 1653-1661. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2227-4
Vaesen K. et Katzav J., 2017, « How much would each researcher receive if competitive government research funding were distributed equally among researchers ? » Plos One, 12 (9). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0183967
van Dijk D., Manor O. et Carey L. B., 2014, « Publication metrics and success on the academic job market », Current Biology, 24 (11), p. 516-517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2014.04.039
Wahls W. P., 2018a, « High cost of bias. Diminishing marginal returns on NIH grant funding to institutions », BioRxiv. The Preprint Server for Biology. https://doi.org/10.1101/367847
Wahls W. P., 2018b, « Point of view. The NIH must reduce disparities in funding to maximize its return on investments from taxpayers », Elife, 7. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.34965