In 2008, the United Kingdom’s higher education sector replaced its method of measuring research quality from the Research Assessment Exercises (RAE) to the Research Excellence Framework (REF). The inaugural REF results, covering the period from 2009 to 2014, were released in 2014.
A recent study from City University found that the REF framework led to an increase in the quantity of high-quality research, but not necessarily the output of each active academic.
Research performance
The researchers examined the impact of the Research Excellence Framework 2014 (REF2014) on research performance and quality across UK universities compared to equivalent institutions in the United States, where no such measure exists.
The study analyzed a sample of 103 UK universities that submitted research to the ‘Economics and Econometrics’ panel or ‘Business and Management’ panel of REF2014. For comparison, a control group of 135 US universities with top-quartile departments of economics or business schools, according to the Research Papers in Economics (RePEc) database from December 2018, was included.
The findings of the study indicate that the implementation of REF2014 significantly increased the research output of UK universities compared to US institutions. However, the number of publications per author did not increase, suggesting that universities focused on hiring more academics to boost research activity rather than supporting existing researchers to produce higher volumes of work.
Increase in publication
On average, the number of publications per department in UK universities increased by 41.37 percent over the REF2014 cycle, with the most significant growth taking place between 2012 and 2014. Moreover, research excellence, measured by publications in top journals (3*, 4*, and 4** journals as measured by Association of Business Schools’ classification of scientific journals), also increased relative to other countries after the implementation of REF.
The study found that the impact of REF2014 on research output was more pronounced in Russell Group universities than non-Russell Group universities. Furthermore, the positive effect of REF2014 was stronger in terms of the number of top publications per author.
The study also showed that universities that switched from the ‘Economics and Econometrics’ RAE2008 panel to the ‘Business and Management’ panel for REF2014 had significantly decreased submissions compared to those that remained with the same panel. Consequently, their proportion of business publications in top journals did not increase.
Overall, the study suggests that the REF2014 had a positive impact on the research performance and quality of UK universities, particularly in terms of increasing research output and excellence, but also highlighted some unintended consequences, such as the focus on hiring more academics rather than supporting existing researchers.
“When compared to US universities, our data shows that the REF incites a higher number of research publications and articles published in the best journals,” the researchers conclude. “However, given the number of publications per author remained stable throughout the research period, this appears to be driven by institutions hiring more academics rather than an intrinsic motivator for academics themselves to publish in leading journals.”
