OOIR: Observatory of International Research

Papers

(The TQCC of Research Evaluation is 4. The table below lists those papers that are above that threshold based on CrossRef citation counts [max. 250 papers]. The publications cover those that have been published in the past four years, i.e., from 2020-03-01 to 2024-03-01.)

Article	Citations
Journal citation reports and the definition of a predatory journal: The case of the Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)	48
No time for that now! Qualitative changes in manuscript peer review during the Covid-19 pandemic	37
The production of scientific and societal value in research evaluation: a review of societal impact assessment methods	32
What effects does international mobility have on scientists’ careers? A systematic review	32
Changing research on research evaluation: A critical literature review to revisit the agenda	30
What are the social and scientific benefits of participating at academic conferences? Insights from a survey among doctoral students and postdocs in Germany	26
Transforming science and society? Methodological lessons from and for transformation research	25
On the relationship between interdisciplinarity and impact: Distinct effects on academic and broader impact	23
Funding acknowledgements in scientific publications: A literature review	17
The role of metrics in peer assessments	16
Profile of authors publishing in ‘predatory’ journals and causal factors behind their decision: A systematic review	15
Does government support of a few leading universities have a broader impact on the higher education system? Evaluation of the Russian University Excellence Initiative	14
The effect of competitive public funding on scientific output: A comparison between China and the EU	14
Capabilities for transdisciplinary research	13
Assessing research excellence: Evaluating the Research Excellence Framework	13
Millennial researchers in a metric-driven scholarly world: An international study	13
A formative approach to the evaluation of Transformative Innovation Policies	13
Fast growth of the number of proceedings papers in atypical fields in the Czech Republic is a likely consequence of the national performance-based research funding system	12
An exploration of referees’ comments published in open peer review journals: The characteristics of review language and the association between review scrutiny and citations	11
Does reviewing experience reduce disagreement in proposals evaluation? Insights from Marie Skłodowska-Curie and COST Actions	11
How far does an emphasis on stakeholder engagement and co-production in research present a threat to academic identity and autonomy? A prospective study across five European countries	11
Understanding and evaluating the impact of integrated problem-oriented research programmes: Concepts and considerations	10
Beyond bean counting: Is the policy effective for the innovation efficiency of wind power industry in China?	10
Spreading the gospel: Legitimating university rankings as boundary work	9
Determinants of quality of research environment: An assessment of the environment submissions in the UK’s Research Excellence Framework in 2014	9

DARE to be different? A novel approach for analysing diversity in collaborative research projects	8
Creating evaluative homogeneity: Experience of constructing a national journal ranking	8
Say my name, say my name: Academic authorship conventions between editorial policies and disciplinary practices	8
The footprint of a metrics-based research evaluation system on Spain’s philosophical scholarship: An analysis of researchers’ perceptions	7
Measuring societal impact of research—Developing and validating an impact instrument for occupational health and safety	7
Do peers share the same criteria for assessing grant applications?	7
Peer review in funding-by-lottery: A systematic overview and expansion	7
The classification of public research organizations: Taxonomical explorations	7
How to evaluateex anteimpact of funding proposals? An analysis of reviewers’ comments on impact statements	7
Science rules! A qualitative study of scientists’ approaches to grant lottery	7
Biographical representation, from narrative to list: The evolution of curricula vitae in the humanities, 1950 to 2010	7
The use of an impact framework to evaluate the impact of research on policy and practice: Screening questionnaires for intellectual disability	6
Pathways for assessing interdisciplinarity: A systematic review	5
Societal targeting in researcher funding: An exploratory approach	5
Open Editors: A dataset of scholarly journals’ editorial board positions	5
SSH researchers make an impact differently. Looking at public research from the perspective of users	5
Interdisciplinary knowledge combinations and emerging technological topics: Implications for reducing uncertainties in research evaluation	5
Estimating the effects of public subsidies on the performance of supported enterprises across firm sizes	5
Interdisciplinary research and policy impacts: Assessing the significance of knowledge coproduction	4
Affective auditing: The emotional weight of the research excellence framework	4
Understanding collaborative interactions in relation to research impact in social sciences and humanities: A meta-ethnography	4
Mirror, mirror on the wall: is economics the fairest of them all? An investigation into the social sciences and humanities in Vietnam	4
Transformative academic institutions: An experimental framework for understanding regional impacts of research	4