Skip to main content

Clarivate Analytics chosen to provide citation data for REF 2021

Research England has announced that Clarivate Analytics' Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) has been chosen to provide the citation metrics for the next UK research assessment exercise - REF2021.

The data supplied by ISI includes the number of times a publication has been cited in other academic publications - referred to as citation counts. According to the latest Research England press release this has been requested by 11 of the 34 expert panels, and will be used to feed into the peer-review process during the research assessment phase of the REF. ISI will use the citation data collected by Web of Science, and then match it to the publication records supplied by institutions. Regarding concerns about the accuracy of the matching process, RE have offered reassurance:
[I]nstitutions submitting during REF 2021 will be able to view the citation counts for items they plan to submit to the REF in the relevant units of assessment and confirm that a correct match has been obtained. (RE, Press release 05/12/2018)
ISI have also confirmed that they will provide an API tool that will help institutions submit their assessment data more easily. They are also providing an online portal where institutions can review citation data, and this will sit separately to the REF submission system.

Clarivate have many arms in the academic research ecosystem, including the referencing software Endnote, the publication submission system Scholar One, and the research information system Converis. They also have a long history of involvement in previous UK research assessment exercises, which was formally known then as RAE before it was changed to REF (Research Excellence Framework).

The full Research England press release can be read here.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Your Open Access - statistics and usage

It's Open Access Week again, and this year the theme is 'Open in order to...' This year's theme is designed to shift discussion away from wider issues of 'openness', and instead direct attention to the tangible benefits of open access. This week we will be publishing a series of posts aimed at  highlighting some of these benefits. In this post we will look at some of the statistics we gather about the open access content in our Repository, and specifically the statistics that we've chosen to highlight in our new Infographic.
Given the theme of this year's Open Access Week, the subject of this post could be appropriately described as 'Open in order to boost downloads' For years we have been collecting usage statistics about the content held in our repository. Up until now this data has been collected and, for the most part, discussed internally; but not any more. Now we want to show the academic community here in St Andrews, whose work populates …

The Great Science Publishing Scandal

For centuries academic journals have been the custodians of scientific knowledge. But in the past few decades this has become increasingly contentious, as publishers continue to boast high profit margins, and their customers, largely academic libraries, continue to face squeezed budgets. Some libraries have cancelled subscriptions, some countries have been in deadlocked negotiations with publishers for months and even years, and many researchers have resorted to illegal means to access research.

But how did it get this way? And is there anything that can be done? In the BBC Radio 4 programme 'The Great Science Publishing Scandal' Matthew Cobb, Professor of Zoology at the University of Manchester, discusses the history leading up to the current crisis, and looks at the ways in which academia can change to redress the balance of power in academic publishing. One such change advocated by professor Cobb is to break the link between prestige journals and academic promotion, and an…

Open Access books: Tony Crook's new book is published OA

This week is Open Access week, and the theme is set to look at the foundational work that is needed to underpin a transition to a world where research results are free and open by default. Recent moves by the open access publisher Knowledge Unlatched have shone a spot light on the need for better cooperation in achieving an open access default for books. Where KU has gone in the direction of commercial proprietary infrastructure, others such as Open Book Publishers have called for more open and transparent cooperation that isn't tied to proprietary commercially driven software. Open Book Publisher's reaction to Knowledge Unlatched is here.

"Academics need to know that there are benefits too, and that the expense of publishing OA is worth it in the long run"
While the debate about the nature of the infrastructure rumbles on, presently we must keep our minds focussed on the individual examples of open access books. Indeed the appetite for open access books is unlikely…