The results of scientific research are varied and numerous. They include scientific articles, intellectual property and excellently trained young scientists. In order to compare the scientific performance of individuals and institutions, the journal impact factor is often used as a key indicator. This gives it a special status, although it has a number of well-documented weaknesses as an instrument for research evaluation, such as its susceptibility to manipulation or the intransparency of its calculation. Instead, the scientific quality of the research performance should always be in the foreground.
"The evaluation of research performance is ever-present in the scientific enterprise, but it should not be reduced to 'journal impact'. In this respect, the DORA statement points the way forward," says Cordula Artelt.
The DORA initiative, launched in 2012, aims to establish recommendations for improving the evaluation of the results of scientific research. These are aimed at scientific institutions themselves and at funding bodies, as well as at publishers and, last but not least, at scientists. The DORA recommendations include:
- Metrics such as the journal impact factor are not to be used alone to make decisions about promotion, funding, hiring, or advancement.
- In addition to the number of published articles, a wide range of different metrics should be used to evaluate research. These include research outputs such as data sets or software solutions, or qualitative indicators such as influence on legislation or practices.
- In personnel actions, the criteria for hiring and promotion should be transparently stated and the quality of research should be emphasized to junior scientists.
Publishers should reduce the journal impact factor as a marketing tool and make the bibliographies of scientific articles freely available under Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication.
DORA Declaration
DORA website with opportunities to sign