Assessment and support of emerging research groups

Area of Science:

• Research Policy and Management
• Bibliometrics
• Scientometrics

Background:

• Current desktop research assessment models rely on oversimplified assumptions regarding research performance indicators and funding criteria.
• These models fail to capture the complexities inherent in evaluating scientific research and supporting diverse research groups.

Purpose of the Study:

• To critique existing, overly simplistic research assessment models.
• To propose alternative assessment approaches that better reflect the complexities of research evaluation.
• To advocate for funding models that support emerging research groups and early career scientists.

Main Methods:

• Critique of a desktop research assessment model based on its assumptions about performance indicators and funding policies.
• Development of alternative assessment frameworks emphasizing preconditions for performance and communication effectiveness.
• Analysis of the limitations of traditional bibliometric indicators and altmetrics.
• Proposal of new funding formulas for research institutions.

Main Results:

• Identified significant limitations in current research assessment models due to oversimplification and questionable assumptions.
• Proposed a shift from performance-based assessment to evaluating preconditions for research success.
• Highlighted the inadequacy of classical bibliometric indicators and altmetrics for early career scientists and emerging groups.
• Introduced alternative funding mechanisms to better support nascent research endeavors.

Conclusions:

• Existing research assessment models require fundamental revision to account for research complexities.
• Alternative assessment frameworks combining metrics and expert knowledge, focusing on preconditions, are more effective.
• Specialized funding formulas are necessary to foster the growth of emerging research groups and support early career scientists.