The field of bibliometrics has undergone tremendous development; quantitative scientometrics indicators, the main outcome, are used to measure practically every aspect of scientific production. Even promotion and funding decisions are now backed up by such indicators.

Yves Gingras in this book aims to question the uses and value, and present the misuses and even the appropriateness of such indicators, in research evaluation. The book is an “opinionated essay” rather than a survey. The first chapter introduces the reader to the field. In the second chapter, the author shows how the field can shed light on and explain the evolution and dynamics of science. The next two chapters analyze the abuses of indicators and explain how a properly defined indicator should look, providing specific examples of ill-defined and invalid indicators (for example, h-index and Shanghai University Ranking). The book closes with a short chapter calling on members of the academic community to keep a critical eye on those policies based solely on such indicators, for example, university rankings.

The book is written in an engaging style. It addresses a wide audience ranging from bibliometrics professionals to managers that design and decide the future of institutions, people, and collective efforts. In our modern world where everything can be sold, bought, and manipulated--even science--seeing the process of research evaluation via quantitative indicators through Gingras’ eyes is worthwhile.