Skip to Main Content
It looks like you're using Internet Explorer 11 or older. This website works best with modern browsers such as the latest versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge. If you continue with this browser, you may see unexpected results.

Research impact and visibility: Responsible research evaluation

The responsible conduct of research

Research metrics are conducted in accordance with responsible scientific practice. See: Responsible conduct of research and procedures for
handling allegations of misconduct in Finland
(pdf)

Respecting of the researcher and their personal data is the starting point for an open and accountable researcher's assessment. Read more from the national recommendation: Good practice in researcher evaluation. Recommendation for the responsible evaluation of a researcher in Finland.

  • The assessment must be conducted in a way that is comprehensible to all parties.
  • Transparency of the assessment; the objectives, methods, materials and interpretation of the results are openly known.
  • Persons being evaluated have the right to know what this material covers and to check the information concerning them. Evaluation must take into account only relevant factors that have been brought to the attention of all parties concerned.
  • Metrics, such as the h-index and other indicators, are justified when used to supplement the qualitative assessment.

Qualitative research evaluation methods, such as peer review, should be used in addition to quantitative indicators.

Responsible metrics and openness

The Tampere higher education community systematically follows up on and evaluates the progress and impact of open science and research and makes the necessary actions to achieve the goals:

The Federation of Finnish Learned Societies has published a recommendation on responsible researcher evaluation. The recommendation has been prepared from the perspective of individual researcher evaluation. The same principles should be followed when evaluating research organizations, research units and research in a broader context:

Publication Forum (in Finnish often referred to as JUFO) evaluates Finnish and foreign academic publication channels. This manual contains the recommendations on the responsible use of the JUFO classification as a research evaluation tool.

As a signatory of the international DORA Declaration (San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment), the University is committed to improving the ways in which the output of scientific research is evaluated in order to make such assessments more open and transparent.

Tools for responsible evaluations

Are you interested in responsible evaluation? Read more: 

Responsible research and innovation

Responsible research and innovation (RRI).

Source: RRI Tools (09/2021)

Arguments for responsible evaluation

  • When evaluating research, organisations should use measures that are based on their mission and values. Campbell’s Law tells us that we get what we measure.
  • When evaluating, use indicators that are appropriate for the things they seek to measure.
  • A combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches usually provide better answers to
    evaluation questions.
  • It is wise to invest for evaluations that gives valid answers and which are implemeted responsibly.
  • The use of poor metrics can lead to negative publicity and might have a negative impact on staff well-being.

Source: INORMS: Five arguments to persuade HE Leaders to evaluate research responsibly (pdf)

Logo

Email: library@tuni.fi
P. 0294 520 900

Kirjaston kotisivut | Library homepage
Andor

Palaute | Feedback