Impact: Public Policy Impact
- Warner, Julian (Participant)
Who is affected
The conclusion of the article was most recently cited in a HEFCE report.
Although peer judgments are commonly used in such cases, quantitative indicators may sometimes aid the decision making: ‘to inform, but not to determine, judgments of research quality’ (Warner, 2000, p. 453). Wouters, P. et al. (2015). The Metric Tide: Literature Review (Supplementary Report I to the Independent Review of the Role of Metrics in Research Assessment and Management). HEFCE. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.5066.3520.
The conclusions of this article uniquely anticipated the central recommendation of the Roberts review of research assessment. The article concluded that, “citation analysis can … be employed as one element used to inform judgment of research quality, with judgment underdetermined by any single element.” The first recommendation of the Roberts report insisted, “Any system of research assessment designed to identify the best research must be based upon the judgement of experts, who may, if they choose, employ performance indicators to inform their judgement.” Review of Research Assessment. Report by Sir Gareth Roberts to the UK funding bodies. Issued for consultation May 2003. The perspective has been increasingly embodied in subsequent research evaluation practice.
Category of impact
- Public Policy Impact
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article