Article ID: | iaor201113014 |
Volume: | 22 |
Issue: | 2 |
Start Page Number: | 202 |
End Page Number: | 217 |
Publication Date: | Jun 2011 |
Journal: | British Journal of Management |
Authors: | Taylor Jim |
Keywords: | metrics, UK, property assessment, peer review |
This paper investigates the extent to which the outcomes of the 2008 Research Assessment Exercise in the UK, determined by peer review, can be explained by a set of quantitative indicators. Three cognate units of assessment are examined in detail: business and management, economics and econometrics, and accounting and finance. The main finding is that each of the three components of research activity (namely, research output, esteem and research environment) is highly correlated with various quantitative indicators. A further finding is that the judgement of the Research Assessment Exercise panels was biased in favour of Russell Group universities. There is also evidence of bias by the economics and econometrics panel. The results support the use of quantitative indicators in the research assessment process, particularly a journal quality index. Requiring the panels to take bibliometric indicators into account should help not only to reduce the workload of panels but also to mitigate the problem of implicit bias.