OOIR: Observatory of International Research

Papers

(The TQCC of Research Evaluation is 5. 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 2021-12-01 to 2025-12-01.)

Article	Citations
Cross-sectional analysis of self-promotional language in texts of grant proposals across gender	39
Globalization of scientific communication: Evidence from authors in academic journals by country of origin	32
Competitive performativity of academic social networks: the subjectivation of competition on ResearchGate	23
How bibliometric evaluation makes the academia an ‘Iron Cage’: Evidence from Chinese academics	22
Do thematic funding instruments lead researchers in new directions? Strategic funding priorities and topic switching among British grant recipients	20
Replicability and the humanities: the problem with universal measures of research quality	18
Enriching research quality: A proposition for stakeholder heterogeneity	17
Towards a sustainable and responsible model for monitoring open science and research—analysis of the Finnish model for monitoring open science and research	17
Simultaneous submissions without simultaneous peer review	16
One size fits all? A comparative review of policy-making in the area of research impact evaluation in the UK, Poland and Norway	14
Evaluation of economic incentives for Chinese university patent transfers: Is increasing the inventor share rate more effective?	14
How impact-focused funding influences researchers’ knowledge mobilization activities	14
Correction to: Stated preference methods and STI policy studies: a foreground approach	14
Impact types and approaches in assessing research impact: from a scoping review to a comprehensive framework	14
The footprint of a metrics-based research evaluation system on Spain’s philosophical scholarship: An analysis of researchers’ perceptions	14
Tilting at twin windmills: On article quotas and journal impact factors	13
Can talent policy promote green technology innovation?	13
When publication metrics become the fetish: The research evaluation systems’ relationship with academic work engagement and burnout	13
Revisiting R&I policy assessment in the EU: a semantic analysis of ERAWATCH and RIO reports	12
Research impact seen from the user side	12
Research impact as understood by two funders of agricultural research in South Africa	11
Linking science and industry: influence of scientific research on technological innovation through patent citations	10
Early career academic's odyssey: A narrative study of her professional identity construction	10
Peer review’s irremediable flaws: Scientists’ perspectives on grant evaluation in Germany	10
Improving the reporting of research impact assessments: a systematic review of biomedical funder research impact assessments	9

Unveiling research productivity barriers via fuzzy AHP: a case of management faculty in India	9
When theory meets practice in transformative innovation policy evaluation: experiences from Sweden	9
Measuring research quality in a more inclusive way: Evidence from the UK Research Excellence Framework	8
Do funding modes matter? A multilevel analysis of funding allocation mechanisms on university research performance	8
Interdisciplinary research and policy impacts: Assessing the significance of knowledge coproduction	8
Transfer versus co-production: Knowledge as ‘MEANS’ to sustainability as an ‘END’	8
Quality from within: Entry points to research quality in the humanities	7
Evaluation as a source of unhappiness in academia—unpacking the boundaries of responsible research assessment	7
Determining and weighting effective outputs of humanities research to meet scientific and professional goals: A study of language and literature fields	7
Unpacking the discourse surrounding the impact agenda in the Hong Kong Research Assessment Exercise 2020	6
Evaluating transformative innovation policy in a formative way: Insights from Vinnova’s food mission experiment	6
Equality and employment aspects of the UK Research Excellence Framework	6
Data inaccuracy quantification and uncertainty propagation for bibliometric indicators	6
A typology of peer-reviewers: role, characteristics, and egoistic and altruistic perspectives	6
Improving universities’ activities in academic startup support through public interventions: The effectiveness of the German programme ‘EXIST—leverage of potentials’	6
Assessing university policies for enhancing societal impact of academic research: A multicriteria mapping approach	6
Repertoires of research value: performing societal impact across countries	5
Exploring research quality and journal representation: a comparative study of African Journals Online, Scopus, and Web of Science	5
The impact of Italian performance-based research funding systems on the intensity of international research collaboration	5
Devices of evaluation: Institutionalization and impact—Introduction to the special issue	5
Research evaluation in Brazil and the Netherlands: a comparative study	5
Prestige of scholarly book publishers—An investigation into criteria, processes, and practices across countries	5
How can societally-targeted research funding shape researcher networks and practices?	5
Quis judicabit ipsos judices? A case study on the dynamics of competitive funding panel evaluations	5
Evaluating co-creation in social innovation projects: Towards a process orientated framework for EU projects and beyond	5
Evaluating participatory research projects through a harmonized, online, self-reflection, and impact-assessment methodology	5
‘I want to be able to do what I know the tools will allow us to do’: Practicing evaluative bibliometrics through digital infrastructure	5
A participatory approach to tracking system transformation in clusters and innovation ecosystems—Evolving practice in Sweden’s Vinnväxt programme	5
Toward a modular evaluation approach of real-world laboratories: Findings from a literature review	5
Spreading the gospel: Legitimating university rankings as boundary work	5
In the eye of beholder? The notions of quality in the humanities	5