Reforming how we judge research

A global movement argues that hiring, promotion, and funding should value the full range of research contributions — not just journal prestige or citation counts. Key initiatives:

  • DORA — do not use journal metrics (like the JIF) to judge individuals; assess research on its own merits.
  • The Leiden Manifesto — ten principles for using metrics well, supporting (not replacing) expert judgement.
  • CoARA — the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment, where institutions commit to concrete reform.
Worked example — a broader view of contribution
Under responsible assessment, a researcher is recognised not only for papers but for shared datasets, open-source software, mentoring, peer review, and real-world impact. A brilliant open dataset used by hundreds of teams becomes visible — where a JIF-only system would ignore it.

🔗 Learn more (free): CoARA — Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment

Try it
Read one DORA principle (sfdora.org) or browse CoARA. Name one research contribution you value that traditional metrics ignore.

Self-check

What kinds of contributions does responsible research assessment make visible that citation counts miss?

© FRELIP, released under CC BY 4.0. Adapted in part from openly-licensed UNESCO (CC BY-SA 3.0 IGO) and institutional research-support materials. Linked resources remain under their own licences. Curated by the FRELIP Open Courseware editorial team.

Modifié le: jeudi 4 juin 2026, 12:52