IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jorssa/v156y1993i2p271-286.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Research Performance of UK Universities: A Statistical Analysis of the Results of the 1989 Research Selectivity Exercise

Author

Listed:
  • Jill Johnes
  • Jim Taylor
  • Brian Francis

Abstract

This paper undertakes a statistical analysis of the Universities Funding Council's 1989 research selectivity exercise, focusing on differences between universities in the research rating obtained by individual cost centres. The statistical analysis indicates that several variables are significantly related to interuniversity variations in research rating. These include a cost centre's size, the research rating of other cost centres in the same institution, research expenditure per staff member and whether a university was previously a college of advanced technology. Several other variables, such as the student:staff ratio, were found to be statistically significant in only a few cost centres.

Suggested Citation

  • Jill Johnes & Jim Taylor & Brian Francis, 1993. "The Research Performance of UK Universities: A Statistical Analysis of the Results of the 1989 Research Selectivity Exercise," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 156(2), pages 271-286, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:156:y:1993:i:2:p:271-286
    DOI: 10.2307/2982732
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2307/2982732
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2307/2982732?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Massimiliano Bratti & Abigail McKnight & Robin Naylor & Jeremy Smith, 2004. "Higher education outcomes, graduate employment and university performance indicators," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 167(3), pages 475-496, August.
    2. Fabian Waldinger, 2016. "Bombs, Brains, and Science: The Role of Human and Physical Capital for the Creation of Scientific Knowledge," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 98(5), pages 811-831, December.
    3. Gianni De Fraja & Giovanni Facchini & John Gathergood, 2016. "How Much Is That Star in the Window? Professorial Salaries and Research Performance in UK Universities," Discussion Papers 2016-13, University of Nottingham, GEP.
    4. Battistin, Erich & Ovidi, Marco, 2017. "Rising Stars," IZA Discussion Papers 11198, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Johnes, Geraint & Johnes, Jill & Virmani, Swati, 2022. "Performance and efficiency in Indian universities," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    6. Doyle, J. R. & Arthurs, A. J. & Green, R. H. & McAulay, L. & Pitt, M. R. & Bottomley, P. A. & Evans, W., 1996. "The judge, the model of the judge, and the model of the judged as judge: Analyses of the UK 1992 research assessment exercise data for business and management studies," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 13-28, February.
    7. Johnes, Jill & Johnes, Geraint, 1995. "Research funding and performance in U.K. University Departments of Economics: A frontier analysis," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 301-314, September.
    8. Johnes, Jill, 1996. "Performance assessment in higher education in Britain," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 18-33, February.
    9. Erich Battistin & Marco Ovidi, 2022. "Rising Stars: Expert Reviews and Reputational Yardsticks in the Research Excellence Framework," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 89(356), pages 830-848, October.
    10. V. A. Traag & L. Waltman, 2019. "Systematic analysis of agreement between metrics and peer review in the UK REF," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-12, December.
    11. Michael Cain & Stuart McLeay, 2016. "Statistical Auditing of Non-transparent Expert Assessments," Sankhya B: The Indian Journal of Statistics, Springer;Indian Statistical Institute, vol. 78(2), pages 362-385, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:156:y:1993:i:2:p:271-286. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rssssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.