Book section Open Access

Research Quality Plus: Another way is possible

Lebel, Jean; McLean, Robert

DataCite XML Export

<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<resource xmlns:xsi="" xmlns="" xsi:schemaLocation="">
  <identifier identifierType="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.3603873</identifier>
      <creatorName>Lebel, Jean</creatorName>
      <creatorName>McLean, Robert</creatorName>
    <title>Research Quality Plus: Another way is possible</title>
    <subject>Research Quality Plus</subject>
    <subject>research excellence</subject>
    <subject>Global South</subject>
    <date dateType="Issued">2020-01-10</date>
  <resourceType resourceTypeGeneral="BookChapter"/>
    <alternateIdentifier alternateIdentifierType="url"></alternateIdentifier>
    <relatedIdentifier relatedIdentifierType="ISBN" relationType="IsPartOf" resourceTypeGeneral="BookChapter">978-1-928502-06-7</relatedIdentifier>
    <relatedIdentifier relatedIdentifierType="DOI" relationType="IsVersionOf">10.5281/zenodo.3603872</relatedIdentifier>
    <relatedIdentifier relatedIdentifierType="URL" relationType="IsPartOf"></relatedIdentifier>
    <rights rightsURI="">Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International</rights>
    <rights rightsURI="info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess">Open Access</rights>
    <description descriptionType="Abstract">&lt;p&gt;This article introduces a different approach to research quality governance. We argue the Research Quality Plus, or RQ+, approach holds practical value for defining, managing, and evaluating quality. For those who wish to move from quality improvement to the comparison and ranking implied by excellence RQ+ may offer a starting point. We note this was not our initial intent. RQ+ was co-developed by the International Development Research Centre with colleagues from across our research community in Africa, Asia, the Caribbean, Latin America and the Middle East. RQ+ builds on the deliberative approach of peer-review and the analytics of biblio- and altmetrics. RQ+ holds three tenets: (1) quality is value-based, (2) context matters, and (3) judgement should be empirical and systematic. We summarise a large-scale meta-analysis of research evaluations conducted using RQ+ to demonstrate initial validation of the approach. We conclude with a call to action for critique, trialing, experimentation, and co-development.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    <description descriptionType="Other">Published by African Minds.</description>
All versions This version
Views 202202
Downloads 104104
Data volume 15.9 MB15.9 MB
Unique views 185185
Unique downloads 9393


Cite as