IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v29y2020i3p231-244..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Determinants of quality of research environment: An assessment of the environment submissions in the UK’s Research Excellence Framework in 2014

Author

Listed:
  • Mehmet Pinar
  • Emre Unlu

Abstract

One of the assessed research elements in the UK’s Research Excellence Framework (REF) exercise in 2014 was the research environment. The quality of the research environment was assessed by expert peer reviewers who were given a set of quantitative factors to support their decision making. However, there is no systematic procedure to integrate this quantitative information into the evaluation process. This article evaluates the relevance of quantitative factors in explaining the assessed quality of the research environment. Findings suggest submitting units with high external research income generation tend to have a better research environment evaluation in almost all the assessed subject areas. The importance given by reviewers to similar quantitative factors was distinctively different in two units of assessment (UoA) in which the evaluation criteria were the same, which highlights the internal inconsistency of the peer review evaluation. Our findings also confirm the existence of the ‘halo effect’ in some UoA where submitting units that belong to the Russell group and have sub-panel members in the REF exercise obtained higher scores even after controlling for the assessed quantitative factors.

Suggested Citation

  • Mehmet Pinar & Emre Unlu, 2020. "Determinants of quality of research environment: An assessment of the environment submissions in the UK’s Research Excellence Framework in 2014," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(3), pages 231-244.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:29:y:2020:i:3:p:231-244.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvaa003
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Mehmet Pinar, 2023. "Do research performances of universities and disciplines in England converge or diverge? An assessment of the progress between research excellence frameworks in 2014 and 2021," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(10), pages 5731-5766, October.
    2. Blanca L. Díaz Mariño & Frida Carmina Caballero-Rico & Ramón Ventura Roque Hernández & José Alberto Ramírez de León & Daniel Alejandro González-Bandala, 2021. "Towards the Construction of Productive Interactions for Social Impact," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-20, January.
    3. Basso, Antonella & di Tollo, Giacomo, 2022. "Prediction of UK research excellence framework assessment by the departmental h-index," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 296(3), pages 1036-1049.
    4. Mehmet Pinar & Timothy J Horne, 2022. "Assessing research excellence: Evaluating the Research Excellence Framework," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(2), pages 173-187.

    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:oup:rseval:v:29:y:2020:i:3:p:231-244.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    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.