The Assessment of Research Quality in UK Universities: Peer Review or Metrics?

Taylorizing business school research: On the ‘one best way’ performative effects of journal ranking lists

“…It is therefore necessary to underscore that it is impossible to know definitively whether the 2008 Panel members assigned a high grade to some articles in journals that were not ranked highly on the available ABS list; or, indeed, if a low grade was given to articles published in more highly ranked journals. Taylor (2011) has used regression analysis to assess the extent to which similar aggregate results could have been obtained by simply using the ABS list together with two other variables measuring the size of the submission, and membership of university groupings such as the Russell Group (a grouping of top UK universities). Taylor found that he could explain around 90% of the variation in mean score per department using these variables, which certainly suggests a high degree of correlation, at least in aggregate, but it does not shed light on differences at particular grade levels -e.g.…”

“…Rowlinson et al, 2011)i. Their use, it is further suggested, can correct the biases ascribed to evaluators of research quality (see, for example, Taylor, 2011). However, when the lists are used as a standard to calculate the equivalent of an exchange value of outputs (e.g.…”

Seven Recommendations to Make Your Invasive Alien Species Data More Useful

“…Yet motivating good data management 7 https://www.ippc.int/en/publications/612/ 8 https://www.ippc.int/en/publications/615/ is not easy when practitioners are not rewarded by their institutions. However, this is changing [54,55], particular with the support of aspirational statements such as the Berlin 9 and Bouchout 10 declarations, which show the willingness of some institutions and individuals to change. Also, there are now policy initiatives in place, such as the EU INSPIRE directive 11 or the United States Administration's Open Data Policy 12,13 , to mandate harmonization of spatial data.…”

Quality in the process of scientific production in accounting in Brazil

“…Finally, a set of studies explores citation analysis (Brown & Gardner, 1985;Dunbar & Weber, 2014); and perceptions of accounting journals quality, also called peer reviews (Ballas & Theoharakis, 2003;Brinn et al, 2001;Brown & Huefner, 1994;Lowe & Locke, 2005;Lowensohn & Samelson, 2006;Taylor, 2011). Such studies, though not specifically focused on the quality attributes of good research, explore quality criteria and their relationship with productivity and quality evaluation of what is published in scientific journals in the area.…”

“…This resource reveals important evidence about the average performance of business scholars, such as the number of contributions, citations, and the h-index is much higher when performances are assessed using Web of Science (Amara & Landry, 2012), so, it can be considered useful to identify the best sources. The focus of the selected set of studies covers citation analysis (Aragão et al, 2014;Brown & Gardner, 1985;Dunbar & Weber, 2014); perceptions of the quality of accounting journals, also called peer reviews (Ballas & Theoharakis, 2003;Brinn et al, 2001;Brown & Huefner, 1994;Lowe & Locke, 2005;Lowensohn & Samelson, 2006;Taylor, 2011); productivity and quality in university business departments Doyle & Arthurs, 1995;M.J. Jones et al, 1996;Martins & Lucena, 2014); quality criteria, such as validity (Libby et al, 2002); rigor (Evans et al, 2015;Williams, 2014); relevance (Reiter & Williams, 2002); impact (Carmona, 2006); and integrity (Andrade, 2011;Antunes et al, 2011); and research practices and features (Martins & Lucena, 2014;Mendonça Neto et al, 2009;Miranda et al, 2011;Taylor, 2011;Theóphilo & Iudícibus, 2005).…”