Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > The Assessment of Research Quality: Peer Review...

Research

Electronic data

View graph of relations

The Assessment of Research Quality: Peer Review or Metrics?

Research output: Working paper

Published

Standard

The Assessment of Research Quality: Peer Review or Metrics? / Taylor, J.
Lancaster University: The Department of Economics, 2009. (Economics Working Paper Series).

Research output: Working paper

Harvard

Taylor, J 2009 'The Assessment of Research Quality: Peer Review or Metrics?' Economics Working Paper Series, The Department of Economics, Lancaster University.

APA

Taylor, J. (2009). The Assessment of Research Quality: Peer Review or Metrics? (Economics Working Paper Series). The Department of Economics.

Vancouver

Taylor J. The Assessment of Research Quality: Peer Review or Metrics? Lancaster University: The Department of Economics. 2009. (Economics Working Paper Series).

Author

Taylor, J. / The Assessment of Research Quality: Peer Review or Metrics?. Lancaster University : The Department of Economics, 2009. (Economics Working Paper Series).

Bibtex

@techreport{9d6ad265fefe4fbe8e30ae7bf1ca2a36,
title = "The Assessment of Research Quality: Peer Review or Metrics?",
abstract = "This paper investigates the extent to which the outcomes of the 2008 Research Assessment Exercise, determined by peer review, can be explained by a set of quantitative indicators, some of which were made available to the review panels. Three cognate units of assessment are examined in detail: business & management, economics & econometrics, and accounting & finance. The paper focuses on the extent to which the quality of research output, as determined by the RAE panel, can be explained by the journal quality indicator published by the Association of Business Schools. The main finding is that although a high proportion of the variation between universities in their RAE outcomes can be explained by quantitative indicators, there is insufficient evidence to support the claim by the ABS that its Journal Quality Guide is a sufficiently accurate predictor of research quality to justify a predominant role in the research assessment process. A further finding is that there appears to be an element of bias in the decisions reached by the business & management panel and by the economics & econometrics panel.",
author = "J Taylor",
year = "2009",
language = "English",
series = "Economics Working Paper Series",
publisher = "The Department of Economics",
type = "WorkingPaper",
institution = "The Department of Economics",

}

RIS

TY - UNPB

T1 - The Assessment of Research Quality: Peer Review or Metrics?

AU - Taylor, J

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 - This paper investigates the extent to which the outcomes of the 2008 Research Assessment Exercise, determined by peer review, can be explained by a set of quantitative indicators, some of which were made available to the review panels. Three cognate units of assessment are examined in detail: business & management, economics & econometrics, and accounting & finance. The paper focuses on the extent to which the quality of research output, as determined by the RAE panel, can be explained by the journal quality indicator published by the Association of Business Schools. The main finding is that although a high proportion of the variation between universities in their RAE outcomes can be explained by quantitative indicators, there is insufficient evidence to support the claim by the ABS that its Journal Quality Guide is a sufficiently accurate predictor of research quality to justify a predominant role in the research assessment process. A further finding is that there appears to be an element of bias in the decisions reached by the business & management panel and by the economics & econometrics panel.

AB - This paper investigates the extent to which the outcomes of the 2008 Research Assessment Exercise, determined by peer review, can be explained by a set of quantitative indicators, some of which were made available to the review panels. Three cognate units of assessment are examined in detail: business & management, economics & econometrics, and accounting & finance. The paper focuses on the extent to which the quality of research output, as determined by the RAE panel, can be explained by the journal quality indicator published by the Association of Business Schools. The main finding is that although a high proportion of the variation between universities in their RAE outcomes can be explained by quantitative indicators, there is insufficient evidence to support the claim by the ABS that its Journal Quality Guide is a sufficiently accurate predictor of research quality to justify a predominant role in the research assessment process. A further finding is that there appears to be an element of bias in the decisions reached by the business & management panel and by the economics & econometrics panel.

M3 - Working paper

T3 - Economics Working Paper Series

BT - The Assessment of Research Quality: Peer Review or Metrics?

PB - The Department of Economics

CY - Lancaster University

ER -