Indicators of research quality, quantity, openness, and responsibility in institutional review, promotion, and tenure policies across seven countries
Dados Bibliográficos
| ID | 21255751 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Nancy Pontika (0000-0002-2091-0402, The Open University), Thomas Klebel (0000-0002-7331-4751, Know Center Research GmbH (Austria)), Antónia Correia (0000-0002-6707-8289, University of Minho), H Metzler (0000-0001-9254-3675, Institute for Globally Distributed Open Research and Education), Petr Knoth (0000-0003-1161-7359, The Open University), Tony Ross-Hellauer (0000-0003-4470-7027, Graz University of Technology) |
| Ano | 2022 |
| Volume | 3 |
| Fascículo | 4 |
| Páginas | 888-911 |
| Data de publicação | 2022-12-20 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sim |
| Open Access | Sim |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Periódico | Quantitative Science Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores do periódico | ISSN: 2641-3337 • E-ISSN: 2641-3337 |
| Editora | MIT Press (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1162/qss_a_00224 |
| OpenAlex | W4309223803 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citações recebidas | 18 |
| Referências citadas | 48 |
The need to reform research assessment processes related to career advancement at research institutions has become increasingly recognized in recent years, especially to better foster open and responsible research practices. Current assessment criteria are believed to focus too heavily on inappropriate criteria related to productivity and quantity as opposed to quality, collaborative open research practices, and the socioeconomic impact of research. Evidence of the extent of these issues is urgently needed to inform actions for reform, however. We analyze current practices as revealed by documentation on institutional review, promotion, and tenure (RPT) processes in seven countries (Austria, Brazil, Germany, India, Portugal, the United Kingdom and the United States). Through systematic coding and analysis of 143 RPT policy documents from 107 institutions for the prevalence of 17 criteria (including those related to qualitative or quantitative assessment of research, service to the institution or profession, and open and responsible research practices), we compare assessment practices across a range of international institutions to significantly broaden this evidence base. Although the prevalence of indicators varies considerably between countries, overall we find that currently open and responsible research practices are minimally rewarded and problematic practices of quantification continue to dominate
Best practice · Business · Documentation · Economic growth · Economics · Environmental health · Openness to experience · Political science · Population · Productivity · Public relations · Socioeconomic status · Innovation Policy and RD · Medicine · Psychology · Research Data Management Practices · scientometrics and bibliometrics research
Authors’ gender and productivity as predictors of reciprocal dynamics in publications and citations in communication
Citation beneficiaries of discipline-specific mega-journals
Co-authorship Networks of Lithuanian Sociologists, 2015–2019
Faculty Perspectives on Open Access
Reconsidering the Assessment Criteria in Academic Recruitment
Through the secret gate
The “leaky pipeline” in the academic growth
The impact of innovation policies on scientometric indicators
Funding and productivity
Compliance with open access mandates and its effects on research visibility
The rise of responsible metrics as a professional reform movement
The use of informetric methods to study diversity in the scientific workforce
Attitudinal, Normative, and Resource Factors Affecting Communication Scholars’ Data Sharing
Knowledge production and the predicaments of postcolonial scholarly book publishing in Africa
What Happens after Tenure? Exploring Stimuli of Promotion to Full Professor in Top-Ranking Criminology and Criminal Justice Programs in the United States
From an Input to an Output
Academic work, hyper-performativity and the professoriate
Funding priorities and health outcomes in Danish medical research
Ggplot2
Bibliometrics
How open science helps researchers succeed
Welcome to the Tidyverse
The Decision-Making Constraints and Processes of Grant Peer Review, and Their Effects on the Review Outcome
Learning from the Experience of Others
Antifragile
Responsible research and innovation
The Impact Factor Fetishism
| Obras citantes distintas | 18 |
|---|---|
| Citações por ano | 6 |
| Intervalo de citações | 2023 - 2026 (4) |
| Velocidade de citação | current |
| Altamente citado | Não |
| Tipos de citação | Neutras: 18 |