Ratings and rankings: Voodoo or science?

  title={Ratings and rankings: Voodoo or science?},
  author={P. Paruolo and A. Saltelli and M. Saisana},
  journal={Quality Engineering},
  • P. Paruolo, A. Saltelli, M. Saisana
  • Published 2011
  • Mathematics, Engineering
  • Quality Engineering
  • Summary.  Composite indicators aggregate a set of variables by using weights which are understood to reflect the variables’ importance in the index. We propose to measure the importance of a given variable within existing composite indicators via Karl Pearson's ‘correlation ratio’; we call this measure the ‘main effect’. Because socio-economic variables are heteroscedastic and correlated, relative nominal weights are hardly ever found to match relative main effects; we propose to summarize… CONTINUE READING

    Figures and Tables from this paper.

    A critical comparative analysis of five world university rankings
    • 50
    • Highly Influenced
    • PDF
    Weights and Importance in Composite Indicators: Mind the Gap
    • 7
    • PDF
    Measuring the Information Society Report
    • 2015
    • 181
    • Highly Influenced
    • PDF


    Publications referenced by this paper.
    Rickety numbers: Volatility of university rankings and policy implications
    • 222
    Report by the commission on the measurement of economic performance and social progress
    • 2,918
    • Highly Influential
    • PDF
    Noncompensatory/nonlinear composite indicators for ranking countries: a defensible setting
    • 166
    • PDF
    Making best use of model evaluations to compute sensitivity indices
    • 1,118
    Differential Weighting: A Review of Methods and Empirical Studies1
    • 184
    • PDF
    Composite Indicators between Analysis and Advocacy
    • 274
    Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis techniques as tools for the quality assessment of composite indicators
    • 501
    • PDF
    Weights in Multidimensional Indices of Well-Being: An Overview
    • 384
    • Highly Influential
    • PDF