IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/lan/wpaper/603570.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Peer assessment of research: how many publications per staff?

Author

Listed:
  • J Taylor
  • I Walker

Abstract

The UK's higher education funding councils have proposed reducing the number of submitted outputs from four to three in the forthcoming Research Excellence Framework to reduce the burden on panel members. This reduction is considered to be sufficient for panels to form a robust view of the achievements of individuals and their departments. The key issue is whether the subject panels would have sufficient information to judge the quality of research at departmental level with details of only three outputs per staff. Two journal quality indicators are used in this note to test the assumption that three publications is likely to be as useful to the panels as four to measure research quality in three cognate units of assessment (business & management, economics & econometrics and accounting & finance). In fact, the results indicate that two publications would be sufficient, thereby providing more time for a careful assessment of submitted outputs.

Suggested Citation

  • J Taylor & I Walker, 2009. "Peer assessment of research: how many publications per staff?," Working Papers 603570, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.
    • Handle: RePEc:lan:wpaper:603570
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/media/lancaster-university/content-assets/documents/lums/economics/working-papers/PeerAssessment.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kodrzycki Yolanda K. & Yu Pingkang, 2006. "New Approaches to Ranking Economics Journals," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-44, August.
    2. J Taylor, 2009. "The Assessment of Research Quality: Peer Review or Metrics?," Working Papers 602544, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.
    3. Yolanda Kodrzycki & Pingkang David Yu, 2005. "New approaches to ranking economics journals," Working Papers 05-12, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. David L. Anderson & John Tressler, 2009. "The Excellence in Research for Australia Scheme: An Evaluation of the Draft Journal Weights for Economics," Working Papers in Economics 09/07, University of Waikato.
    2. Dan Ben-David, 2010. "Ranking Israel’s economists," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(2), pages 351-364, February.
    3. Ana Rute Cardoso & Paulo Guimarães & Klaus F. Zimmermann, 2010. "Trends in Economic Research: An International Perspective," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(4), pages 479-494, November.
    4. David L. Anderson & John Tressler, 2009. "The ‘Excellence in Research for Australia’ Scheme: A Test Drive of Draft Journal Weights with New Zealand Data," Agenda - A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics, vol. 16(4), pages 7-24.
    5. Frances P. Ruane & Richard S.J. Tol, 2007. "Centres of Research Excellence in Economics in the Republic of Ireland," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 38(3), pages 289-322.
    6. Marlène Koffi, 2021. "Gendered Citations at Top Economic Journals," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 111, pages 60-64, May.
    7. Peter Boone & Alex Eble & Diana Elbourne, 2013. "Risk and Evidence of Bias in Randomized Controlled Trials in Economics," CEP Discussion Papers dp1240, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    8. Sergio Da Silva, 2009. "Going parochial in the assessment of the Brazilian economics research output," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 29(4), pages 2832-2852.
    9. repec:lan:wpaper:983 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. David Anderson & John Tressler, 2008. "Research output in New Zealand economics departments 2000-2006: A stock approach," New Zealand Economic Papers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(2), pages 155-189.
    11. Howard J. Wall, 2009. "Journal rankings in economics: handle with care," Working Papers 2009-014, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
    12. Lorenzo Ductor & Sanjeev Goyal & Anja Prummer, 2018. "Gender & Collaboration," Working Papers 856, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    13. David L. Anderson & John Tressler, 2013. "The Relevance of the “h-” and “g-” Index to Economics in the Context of A Nation-Wide Research Evaluation Scheme: The New Zealand Case," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 32(1), pages 81-94, March.
    14. Miguel Sarmiento, 2010. "Central Bank Economic Research: Output, Demand, Productivity, and Relevance," Money Affairs, CEMLA, vol. 0(2), pages 211-240, July-Dece.
    15. Jishnu Das & Quy-Toan Do, 2020. "US and them - The geography of academic research," Vox eBook Chapters, in: Sebastian Galliani & Ugo Panizza (ed.), Publishing and Measuring Success in Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 1, pages 111-114, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    16. J. A. García & Rosa Rodriguez-Sánchez & J. Fdez-Valdivia & J. Martinez-Baena, 2012. "On first quartile journals which are not of highest impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(3), pages 925-943, March.
    17. Pedro Albarrán & Raquel Carrasco & Javier Ruiz-Castillo, 2017. "Are Migrants More Productive Than Stayers? Some Evidence From A Set Of Highly Productive Academic Economists," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(3), pages 1308-1323, July.
    18. Niclas Berggren, 2012. "Time for behavioral political economy? An analysis of articles in behavioral economics," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 25(3), pages 199-221, September.
    19. Yong Bao & Melody Lo & Franklin G. Mixon, 2010. "General-interest versus specialty journals: Using intellectual influence of econometrics research to rank economics journals and articles," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(2), pages 345-353.
    20. John Gibson & David L. Anderson & John Tressler, 2017. "Citations Or Journal Quality: Which Is Rewarded More In The Academic Labor Market?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(4), pages 1945-1965, October.
    21. Eduardo A. Haddad & Jesus P. Mena-Chalco, Otávio J.G. Sidone, 2016. "Produção Científica e Redes de Colaboração dos Docentes Vinculados aos Programas de Pós-graduação em Economia no Brasil," Working Papers, Department of Economics 2016_10, University of São Paulo (FEA-USP).

    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:lan:wpaper:603570. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Giorgio Motta (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/delanuk.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.