IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v53y2024i10s0048733324001422.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Beyond declarations: Metrics, rankings and responsible assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Morgan-Thomas, Anna
  • Tsoukas, Serafeim
  • Dudau, Adina
  • Gąska, Paweł

Abstract

Responsible assessment promotes expert judgment and opposes sole reliance on research metrics when assessing research excellence. While many institutions and national research panels declare commitment to responsible assessment practices, we ask: have these declarations affected the outcomes of research evaluation? Using data from the UK's 2021 national research quality exercise and focusing on the business and management discipline, we show that the strong association between journal rankings and expert evaluations has not changed, despite institutional endorsements of DORA (Declaration on Research Assessment). Additionally, we find that this correlation is strongest for the most prestigious journals. The implications of these findings are profound: they enhance understanding of the use of metrics in research evaluations post-DORA and highlight potential constraints in the deployment of responsible assessment.

Suggested Citation

  • Morgan-Thomas, Anna & Tsoukas, Serafeim & Dudau, Adina & Gąska, Paweł, 2024. "Beyond declarations: Metrics, rankings and responsible assessment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(10).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:53:y:2024:i:10:s0048733324001422
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2024.105093
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733324001422
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2024.105093?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:eee:respol:v:53:y:2024:i:10:s0048733324001422. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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.