The Assessment of Research Quality: Peer Review or Metrics?

Jim Taylor

No 602544, Working Papers from Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department

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.

Date: 2009
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/media/lancaster-univers ... /ResearchQuality.pdf (application/pdf)

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:lan:wpaper:602544

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Working Papers from Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Giorgio Motta (g.motta@lancaster.ac.uk).