OOIR: Observatory of International Research

Papers

(The TQCC of Research Evaluation is 5. The table below lists those papers that are above that threshold based on CrossRef citation counts [max. 250 papers]. The publications cover those that have been published in the past four years, i.e., from 2021-06-01 to 2025-06-01.)

Article	Citations
Competitive performativity of academic social networks: the subjectivation of competition on ResearchGate	103
Enriching research quality: A proposition for stakeholder heterogeneity	27
How bibliometric evaluation makes the academia an ‘Iron Cage’: Evidence from Chinese academics	24
Globalization of scientific communication: Evidence from authors in academic journals by country of origin	24
Towards a sustainable and responsible model for monitoring open science and research—analysis of the Finnish model for monitoring open science and research	24
Cross-sectional analysis of self-promotional language in texts of grant proposals across gender	17
A Research Pathway Model for evaluating the implementation of practice-based research: The case of self-management health innovations	15
Do thematic funding instruments lead researchers in new directions? Strategic funding priorities and topic switching among British grant recipients	15
The footprint of a metrics-based research evaluation system on Spain’s philosophical scholarship: An analysis of researchers’ perceptions	14
Correction to: Stated preference methods and STI policy studies: a foreground approach	13
Can talent policy promote green technology innovation?	13
Evaluation of economic incentives for Chinese university patent transfers: Is increasing the inventor share rate more effective?	13
Revisiting R&I policy assessment in the EU: a semantic analysis of ERAWATCH and RIO reports	12
Research impact seen from the user side	12
One size fits all? A comparative review of policy-making in the area of research impact evaluation in the UK, Poland and Norway	12
Researcher experiences in practice-based interdisciplinary research	12
Tilting at twin windmills: On article quotas and journal impact factors	11
Self-evaluating participatory research projects: A content validation of the InSPIRES online impact evaluation tool	10
When publication metrics become the fetish: The research evaluation systems’ relationship with academic work engagement and burnout	10
Peer review’s irremediable flaws: Scientists’ perspectives on grant evaluation in Germany	9
Early career academic's odyssey: A narrative study of her professional identity construction	9
Research impact as understood by two funders of agricultural research in South Africa	9
Linking science and industry: influence of scientific research on technological innovation through patent citations	8
Unveiling research productivity barriers via fuzzy AHP: a case of management faculty in India	8
When theory meets practice in transformative innovation policy evaluation: experiences from Sweden	8

Measuring research quality in a more inclusive way: Evidence from the UK Research Excellence Framework	8
Transfer versus co-production: Knowledge as ‘MEANS’ to sustainability as an ‘END’	8
Improving the reporting of research impact assessments: a systematic review of biomedical funder research impact assessments	7
Do funding modes matter? A multilevel analysis of funding allocation mechanisms on university research performance	7
Exploring research impact models: A systematic scoping review	7
Being a female academic under neoliberal evaluation: A systematic review	7
Determining and weighting effective outputs of humanities research to meet scientific and professional goals: A study of language and literature fields	7
Interdisciplinary research and policy impacts: Assessing the significance of knowledge coproduction	7
Teachers conceptualizing and developing assessment for skill development: Trialing a maker assessment framework	7
Say my name, say my name: Academic authorship conventions between editorial policies and disciplinary practices	6
Assessing university policies for enhancing societal impact of academic research: A multicriteria mapping approach	6
Unpacking the discourse surrounding the impact agenda in the Hong Kong Research Assessment Exercise 2020	6
A typology of peer-reviewers: role, characteristics, and egoistic and altruistic perspectives	6
Quality from within: Entry points to research quality in the humanities	6
Spreading the gospel: Legitimating university rankings as boundary work	5
Evaluating participatory research projects through a harmonized, online, self-reflection, and impact-assessment methodology	5
Beyond bean counting: Is the policy effective for the innovation efficiency of wind power industry in China?	5
Evaluating transformative innovation policy in a formative way: Insights from Vinnova’s food mission experiment	5
In the eye of beholder? The notions of quality in the humanities	5
Data inaccuracy quantification and uncertainty propagation for bibliometric indicators	5
‘I want to be able to do what I know the tools will allow us to do’: Practicing evaluative bibliometrics through digital infrastructure	5
Devices of evaluation: Institutionalization and impact—Introduction to the special issue	5
Improving universities’ activities in academic startup support through public interventions: The effectiveness of the German programme ‘EXIST—leverage of potentials’	5