In defense of quantitative metrics in researcher assessments

Abstract

Qualitative assessments of researchers are resource-intensive, untenable in nonmeritocratic settings, and error-prone. Although often derided, quantitative metrics could help improve research practices if they are rigorous, field-adjusted, and centralized.

Towards a Vision for Team Science at Tilburg University

“…Both NWO and ERC are signatories to DORA, and have adopted the "narrative CV" format for grant applications, which allows for such diversity in output and impact measures. Note that there are valid concerns about qualitative evaluation, as it is prone to bias and gaming, and poorly suited for comparing candidates (Ioannidis and Maniadis 2023). With this in mind, TiU should remain informed about the ongoing development of reliable and valid individual-level quantitative evaluation criteria, and open source databases on which to base them (Ioannidis and Maniadis 2023).…”