Skip to main content

When it comes to research evaluations, peer reviews and bibliometric analysis should be viewed as complementary rather than determinate, according to new paper

New research from Queen Mary University of London suggests that when it comes to large-scale research evaluations such as the Research Excellence Framework (REF), peer reviews would be more cost-effective if targeted to publications not appearing in outstanding journals.

Published on:

Related items

For media information, contact:

Back to top