Open science and research

National recommendations for responsible researcher evaluation

Researcher evaluation shapes and directs research. The entire research community should take responsibility for the principles and practices of researcher evaluation. This recommendation for the responsible evaluation of a researcher provides the basis for a functioning, diverse and flourishing research community.

The national recommendation presents the general principles of  researcher evaluation as follows: 

  1. Transparency. The objectives,  methods,  materials and interpretation of the results must be known to everyone involved in the evaluation. The evaluation must be conducted in a manner that is understood by all parties involved. The evaluation  process and all its stages must be  clearly and transparently described.  The party responsible for the evaluation must ensure that the choices made in the evaluation work are properly reasoned and the evaluation documented in a reliable manner.
  2. Integrity. Evaluation must be  conducted in accordance with practices recognized by the research community, such as integrity, diligence, and accuracy.
  3. Fairness. All those subject to evaluation must be treated equally and impartially. Evaluation must take into account only relevant factors that  have been brought to the attention of all parties concerned. Characteristics or circumstances associated with persons being evaluated or people close to them that are irrelevant to the objective of the evaluation must not be used as evaluation criteria.
  4. Competence. Evaluators must have the necessary substantive competence and knowledge of the  objectives and methods of the evaluation process and with the  principles and practices of responsible evaluation of a researcher. In addition to their qualifications, evaluators must not have a conflict of interest and their  collective expertise should be diverse.
  5. Diversity. Evaluation must take into account the diversity of research and outputs.

The recommendation presents good practices in research evaluation 

  • Building the evaluation
  • Evaluation of research
  • Diversity of activities
  • Researcher’s role in the process

Aalto University is committed to the responsible researcher evaluation.

Have a look at other recommendations on research and researcher assessment

Declaration of Research Assessment, DORA

There is a need to improve the ways in which the output of scientific research is evaluated by funding agencies, academic institutions, and other parties. Declaration of Research Assessment, DORA, was one of the first initiatives to improve the ways in which researchers and the outputs of scholarly research are evaluated

Dora

Leiden Manifest

Leiden Manifest offers best practice and principles on metrics-based research assessment

leiden manifest

EU's Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment

The vision the agreement is that the assessment of research, researchers and research organisations recognises the diverse outputs, practices and activities that maximise the quality and impact of research.

Science Europe logo

Go to Aalto University Research assessments page

Research assessments

Aalto University regularly assess the quality of its research and artistic activities, and its societal impact. The assessment is based on internationally agreed best practices and peer review.

Two women analysing the content of a test tube
  • Published:
  • Updated:
Share
URL copied!