EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Semantic tone of research ‘environment’ submissions in the UK’s Research Evaluation Framework 2014

Andy Thorpe, Russell Craig, Glenn Hadikin and Sasa Batistic

Research Evaluation, 2018, vol. 27, issue 2, 53-62

Abstract: This article applies DICTION computer-assisted text analysis software to evaluate the tone of research ‘Environment’ submissions by Business and Management Studies schools in the UK’s 2014 Research Evaluation Framework. We find that submissions contain distinctive differences in semantic tone between high-ranked and low-ranked universities, particularly in terms of DICTION’s master variable, ACTIVITY. The language of high-ranked institutions has a tone of low ACTIVITY, whereas the language of low-ranked institutions has a tone of high ACTIVITY. More adjectives are used than expected: by high-ranked universities to bolster strong public reputations, and by low-ranked universities to atone for weaknesses. High-ranked universities are advantaged because they are more likely to be represented on assessing panels and be better-attuned to reader expectations. The results suggest that low-ranked universities could have achieved higher scores by reflecting on particular areas of word choice and the potential effects of those choices on assessors.

Keywords: research; environment; submissions; text analysis; tone; evaluation (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvx039 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:rseval:v:27:y:2018:i:2:p:53-62.

Access Statistics for this article

Research Evaluation is currently edited by Julia Melkers, Emanuela Reale and Thed van Leeuwen

More articles in Research Evaluation from Oxford University Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().

 
Page updated 2025-03-22
Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:27:y:2018:i:2:p:53-62.