What do we mean by responsible research metrics?
Responsible research metrics refer to the thoughtful and ethical use of quantitative indicators when assessing research quality, impact, and performance. Rather than relying on simplistic measures like journal impact factors or citation counts alone, responsible metrics aim to support fair, transparent, and context-sensitive evaluation.
Responsible research metrics at Royal Holloway, University of London
At Royal Holloway, we are committed to fostering a research culture that values integrity, inclusivity, and excellence. The responsible use of research metrics is central to this commitment. This page outlines our approach to using metrics thoughtfully and transparently in research assessment.
Our approach is grounded in internationally recognised frameworks such as of the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) and the Leiden Manifesto.
Our Commitments
As a signatory of DORA, Royal Holloway is committed to upholding the principles of the declaration to enable better practice in research assessment.
The University is committed to:
- Upholding the integrity of all research outputs by affiliated authors
- Ensuring equitable and transparent evaluation for progression opportunities.
- Demonstrating and understanding the influence and impact of our research.
Principles for the Responsible Use of Metrics
- Expert judgment first: research evaluation should be grounded in expert peer review. Metrics can complement, but not replace, qualitative assessment. Quantitative metrics may be used to support and inform this judgement where this is appropriate context for a particular disciplinary field.
- Focus on the research itself: it is recognised that reviewers will have field-specific knowledge regarding the variation in quality and rigour of peer review and reach of journals and other publication venues in their disciplines. However, these external factors should only support, and not replace, direct evaluation of the research itself.
- Context matters: different disciplines use metrics differently. A one-size-fits-all approach is inappropriate.
- Use transparent and recognised metrics: choose well-understood indicators, including qualitative indicators of research impact, such as influence on policy and practice, where appropriate. When using new metrics, evaluate their validity and susceptibility to misuse.
- Multiple metrics preferred: when metrics are used, best practice is to use multiple indicators to provide a more complete picture.
- Normalise where necessary: adjust metrics for field, career stage, and time to ensure fair comparisons.
- Integrity over incentives: responsible use of metrics should align with our commitment to research integrity and avoid incentivising behaviours that run counter to this.
- The University will ensure that key performance indicators are carefully selected and appropriately normalised before any analysis is conducted.
- The University will be transparent about the use of metrics, especially when used for decisions relating to hiring, promotion and the allocation of internal funding.
Expectations for University representatives
The University expects all individuals involved in research evaluation to:
- assess whether the use of metrics is appropriate and genuinely enhances expert judgment, rather than replacing it
- use metrics transparently, providing clear, plain-language explanations that describe the data, its meaning, limitations, and reliability
- clearly define the purpose or question of any analysis before selecting metrics or methods. In line with the Leiden Manifesto, performance should be measured against the specific research goals of the individual, group, or institution
- avoid relying on single metrics when making critical decisions. Where possible, use more than one metric to verify assessments and normalised where appropriate- for example, to account for disciplinary differences or career stages.
- regularly review and evaluate the continued relevance and effectiveness of commonly used metrics to ensure they remain suitable and meaningful.
Metrics must be applied with care and appropriate justification. They should not be used:
- without clear rationale. Metrics must be tailored to the specific question being addressed, the data available and the intended purpose of the assessment.
- when the data is too limited or incomplete to support a meaningful or reliable interpretation
- as the sole basis for decisions that impact an individual personally, particularly in matters of employment, recognition, reward or reputation. In such cases, metrics should complement, not replace informed expert evaluation.
Our Policies and Procedures
Our institutional policy on Responsible Research Metrics is currently in the process of formal approval. This policy will set out clear expectations for the fair and effective use of metrics in research assessment across the university.
Alongside the policy, we are developing an action plan to support its implementation. This plan includes and engagement and awareness-raising campaign, production of guidelines on responsible use of metrics to be integrated all into recruitment, probation and promotion processes, development of training resources for those making assessments on research quality, and ongoing evaluation of evaluation practices.
Updates will be shared once the policy is finalised, and the action plan is approved for implementation.
Useful links
We encourage all staff and collaborators to explore the foundational resources that inform our approach:
Training and guidance
Guidance and Training on responsible research metrics will be made available to all academic staff in due course.
We are currently developing a suite of resources to support academic staff and students in understanding and applying responsible metrics in research evaluation. Our aim is to ensure that all members of the university community feel confident in using research metrics appropriately and in line with our institutional principles.
Contact us
For general enquiries please contact Integrity@rhul.ac.uk
