Which factors drive the decision to opt out of individual research rankings? An empirical study of academic resistance to change

• Published in: Research policy Vol. 44; no. 5; pp. 1108 - 1115
• Main Authors: Berlemann, Michael, Haucap, Justus
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Amsterdam Elsevier B.V 01.06.2015; Elsevier Sequoia S.A
• Subjects: Academic performance; Bibliometrics; Boycotts; Cost benefit analysis; Decision analysis; Germany; Hypothesis; Quantitative analysis; Ratings & rankings; Research and development; Research assessment; Research evaluation; Research policy; Research ranking; Scholarly publishing; Studies; Universities; University governance; University ranking; Western Europe; Germany; A10; A11; Research assessment; Academic performance; I23; Research ranking; University governance; Research evaluation; University ranking
• ISSN: 0048-7333; 1873-7625
• DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2014.12.002

•Empirical analysis of a boycott decision of a research ranking of business scholars.•Boycott of research evaluation can be explained by individual costs and benefits.•Junior and better published scientists are less likely to boycott the ranking.•Tenured scientists are more likely to boycott the research evaluation exercise.•More quantitatively oriented researchers are less likely to boycott the ranking. Quantitative measures of research output, especially bibliometric measures, have not only been introduced within research funding systems in many countries, but they are also increasingly used in the media to construct rankings of universities, faculties and even individual scientists. In almost all countries, in which significant attempts have been made to quantify research output, parts of the scientific community have criticized the specific procedures used or even protested against them. In 2012, a significant fraction of German business scholars has even opted out of the most important German research ranking for business and economics which is conducted by the Germany's leading business daily Handelsblatt. Using this example, we show that observed resistance to change can consistently be explained by observable factors related to individual cost and benefits of the concerned researchers. We present empirical evidence consistent with the hypothesis that those scholars for whom the costs of a change in evaluation methods exceed the expected benefits are more likely to boycott the ranking exercise.