Lizzie Gadd asks whether more could be done to build confidence in the REF peer review process. Introduction Peer review is still held up as the gold standard of research evaluation, and, for most, infinitely preferable to metrics. As such, the REF prides itself on being “a process of expert peer review”, so reads its guiding principle. But the status of peer review has taken rather a battering in recent years.

In this post, Dr Karen Rowlett summarises the recent #LisBib19 conference held on 29th January 2019. Many thanks to the hosts, organisers, speakers, panellists, sponsors and participants for a very interesting day, and link to presentations are is also included. Torsten Reimer set the tone for our discussions by reminding us that metrics are about people’s …

Continue reading "LIS Bibliometrics 2019 Event Summary and Outputs – Open Metrics and Measuring Openness"

The 2019 lis-bibliometric event is coming up very soon!   On Tuesday 29th January 2019, the lis-bibliometric community will gather at the British Library Conference Centre for a jam-packed day of discussions around open metrics and measuring openness. This year’s event (kindly sponsored by Digital Science) will feature two highly anticipated keynote presentations from Catriona …

Continue reading "LIS Bibliometrics 2019 Event: Open Metrics and Measuring Openness"

In this guest post, Jeffrey Demaine explores some tipping points in Open scholarly communication, and what it means in the context of Canada’s research landscape. After more than a decade of incremental progress towards OpenAccess publishing, some national research-funding bodies are ready to engineer disruptive change in the way scholarly communication works.

Lizzie Gadd considers the practical implications of the responsible research evaluation requirement of the Wellcome Trust’s new Open Access Policy. Responsible research evaluation is important. Really important. It’s not only quality-of-life important but life-or-death important to many over-worked, over-evaluated and under-resourced researchers.

In this blog post, Dr Muriel E Swijghuisen Reigersberg (University of Sydney), provides an insight of metrics and research assessment in the Australian research landscape, and how it compares to that of the UK. How are metrics, research assessment, league tables, open access and researcher development interrelated, and how does this vary from one country …

Continue reading "Metrics, Research Assessment and League Tables: An Australian perspective – Guest post by Muriel Swijghuisen Reigersberg"

In the light of the Wellcome Trust’s new responsible metrics mandate Lizzie Gadd reports on the findings from the Lis-Bibliometrics 2018 Responsible Metrics State-of-the-Art survey.

In September 2018, Lizzie Gadd and Ian Rowlands published the findings from a Lis-Bibliometrics survey of bibliometric practitioners as to how they’d like to see bibliometric and altmetric tools improve. The survey was aimed at starting a dialogue with the supplier community around how these tools might develop to better meet end-user needs.

Katie Evans reflects on how their principles of research assessment and management are being applied at the University of Bath – one year on. What difference does having a responsible metrics statement make? And how do you tell if a statement is doing what you need it to do? We published the University of Bath’s Principles of research assessment and management in March 2017.

Lizzie Gadd and Ian Rowlands report on the Lis-Bibliometrics survey of end-users around how bibliometric and altmetric suppliers might improve their services. It’s fun being on the Lis-Bibliometrics Committee.

Is the best way of incentivising open scholarship to measure it?  Lizzie Gadd is not so sure. There is a lot of talk at the moment about measuring open scholarship as means of incentivising it.