Resource Library

A collection of materials to facilitate the development of responsible research and researcher assessment policies and practices.

Search and Filter

Resource type

Intended audience


Good practicesPosition papers
For: Research institutes
In support of the Dutch Recognition and Rewards Programme, Leiden University published a position paper “Academia in Motion: Recognition & Rewards at Leiden University” in 2021. In 2020, Leiden University’s Executive Board established a Recognition & Rewards steering committee made up of staff from a variety of positions and roles. The goals of the Recognition…
Journal articles
For: Research institutes
To improve research assessment practices in academic institutions, it is critical to understand the institutional metrics used to assess research quality for promotion. This article examines traditional and non-traditional criteria used to assess biomedical scientists for promotion and tenure in 92 randomly selected international institutions. The study found that the evaluation of scientists emphasizes traditional…
Good practicesPosition papers
For: Research institutes
In this article, Jonathan Grant outlines nine cases that highlight examples of new academic incentives at multiple levels (e.g., system, institution, and individual level). These include: System-Level Examples like the United Kingdom Research Excellence Framework (REF), which reviews the quality of research conducted at universities in the United Kingdom, including societal impact and research environment.…
Good practices
For: Professional societies
Three national academies issued a statement on good practice in the evaluation of researchers and research programs in October of 2017. The statement recognized the need for efficient, fair, and robust researcher evaluation, especially as the size of the research community continues to increase.
Journal articles
For: FundersProfessional societiesResearch institutes
A survey was conducted by Noémie Aubert Bonn and Wim Pinxten to understand how Flemish researchers work and how they would rate the relevance of specific research assessment indicators in career advancement and advancing science. Survey results suggested that current indicators used to assess career advancement (e.g., indicators of prestige like high journal impact factor…
Good practices
For: Professional societies
The idea for the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment began at the 2012 ASCB Annual Meeting. As one of the initial DORA signatories, the ASCB does not promote its publications by the Journal Impact Factor.
Good practices
For: Funders
Applicants understand how funding decisions are made, because the Agency openly shares a general summary of its decision-making process on their website written in English and French.
Tools
ASAPbio (Accelerating Science and Publication in Biology) tracks preprint policies and practices at journals, funders, and universities.
Journal articles
For: Research institutes
Six principles for hiring, promotion, and tenure were developed at a one-day workshop in Washington DC in January 2017 to address incentives and rewards in research assessment.
Good practicesPolicies and guidance
For: Funders
The NHMRC guide for peer review instructs assessors not to rely on the Journal Impact Factor when making judgments.
Good practicesPolicies and guidance
For: Funders
The FWF recognizes a diverse range of research outcomes and requires grant applicants to provide information on various research achievements.
Good practices
For: Funders
CRUK recognizes value from all outputs of research, including publications. CRUK has modified its grant application process to ask candidates to describe the significance and impact of 3-5 key research achievements, which can include preprints, training delivered, contribution to consortia, patents, and sharing of key datasets, software, novel assays and reagents, and research publications.
Tools
The Center for Open Science has a collection of open science policies at universities and examples of job announcements that mention open science. The Open Science Framework (OSF) also has a project that archives job offers that require or suggest an open science statement from applicants.
Good practicesTools
For: FundersResearch institutes
CIRAD developed the ImpresS method to assess the environmental and societal impact its research.
Advocacy resources
DORA-produced
The badges for our signatories show support for DORA, raise awareness about research assessment, and serve as a conversation starter with individuals or organizations that have not heard about DORA yet.
Advocacy resources
DORA-produced
We know that slide presentations are one of the primary means of academic communication. To help you talk about research assessment, we created three presentations that are available for download.
Good practices
For: Funders
The application process for EMBO Long-Term Fellowships emphasizes the most important outcomes and impact of the applicant’s work rather than where it is published and specifically states that journal impact factors should not be provided.
Good practices
For: Funders
The fundamental activity of the ERC is to provide attractive, long-term funding to support Principal Investigators and their research teams to pursue ground-breaking, high-gain/high-risk research. The ERC puts particular emphasis on the frontiers of science and scholarship. In particular, it encourages proposals of a multi- or interdisciplinary nature which cross the boundaries between different fields…
Good practicesPosition papers
For: Funders
Evaluation of Research Careers fully Acknowledging Open Science Practices, a report released by the European Commission in 2017, recognizes the emerging Open Science movement creates an opportunity to develop an evaluation system for hiring and promotion that is focused on the equal treatment of applicants.
Good practicesPosition papers
For: Professional societiesResearch institutes
The Federation released a report in 2017 to support the ongoing conversation in Canada about the assessment of research impact in the Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS).
Good practices
For: Research institutes
Ghent University published a vision statement for evaluating research based on eight principles agreed on by the University’s Board of Governors.
Case studies
DORA-produced
In response to an institutional culture that had become overly reliant on quantitative indicators for research assessment, and from a desire to promote a less competitive academic environment with a renewed focus on collaboration, Ghent University developed a new conceptual framework for research evaluation that is guided by eight principles.
InitiativesPosition papers
For: Research institutes
A working group set up by the Federation of Finnish Learned Societies produced guidelines to improve how researchers are assessed in Finland. The report provides a set of general principles (transparency, integrity, fairness, competence, and diversity) that apply throughout 13 recommended good practices to improve four aspects of researcher evaluation.
Advocacy resources
For: FundersProfessional societiesResearch institutes
The Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS) studies bibliometric and scientometric tools to support research assessment reform and strategic decision making for developing science policy. In March 2021, the CWTS published an infographic on “problems with the H-index and reasons for integrating other contributions into evaluations”. This infographic gives different examples of how the…
Good practices
For: Funders
The Health Research Board (HRB) has taken several actions since 2016 to implement DORA’s principles in its grant review process.