How the ONE Research Community Framework Tackles Cognitive and Systemic Biases in Research Assessment
Fuente:
Zenodo
Gespeichert in:
| 1. Verfasser: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Recurso digital |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Zenodo
2025
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| _version_ | 1866902228801945600 |
|---|---|
| author | Mendez-Vasquez, Raul-Isaac |
| author_facet | Mendez-Vasquez, Raul-Isaac |
| contents | <p>The document explains how the <strong>ONE Framework</strong> addresses the unintended biases that distort traditional research evaluation processes. It identifies key issues highlighted by initiatives such as <strong>DORA</strong> — including overreliance on bibliometric indicators, prestige-driven decision-making, and systemic inequities affecting early-career and interdisciplinary researchers — and demonstrates how the ONE Framework mitigates these through its <strong>cohort-based, multidimensional approach</strong>.</p> <p>The paper examines five major sources of bias in research assessment — <strong>overreliance on “objective” metrics</strong>, <strong>the halo effect</strong>, <strong>availability bias</strong>, <strong>status quo bias</strong>, and <strong>Campbell’s Law</strong> — and outlines the mechanisms by which the ONE Framework neutralizes each of them. By emphasizing <strong>contextual evaluation</strong>, <strong>data transparency</strong>, and <strong>modular weighting of indicators</strong>, ONE promotes fairness and inclusivity while maintaining analytical rigor.</p> <p>Through a structured model integrating over <strong>70 indicators</strong> across three main axes — <em>Performance</em>, <em>Interaction within the Scientific Community</em>, and <em>Interaction with Society</em> — the framework shifts the focus from prestige or volume to <strong>real, contextualized impact</strong>. It encourages evaluators to consider mentoring, collaboration, leadership, openness, and societal engagement alongside academic output.</p> <p>Ultimately, this document positions the ONE Framework as a <strong>practical implementation</strong> of the principles championed by <strong>DORA</strong>, <strong>COARA</strong>, and <strong>UNESCO’s Open Science Recommendation</strong>, turning abstract commitments to fairness and transparency into operational, data-driven tools. It invites funders, institutions, and policymakers to adopt these practices to ensure <strong>balanced, bias-aware, and equitable evaluation</strong> across all stages of research careers.</p> |
| format | Recurso digital |
| id | zenodo_https___doi_org_10_5281_zenodo_17271939 |
| institution | Zenodo |
| language | eng |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| publisher | Zenodo |
| record_format | zenodo |
| spellingShingle | How the ONE Research Community Framework Tackles Cognitive and Systemic Biases in Research Assessment Mendez-Vasquez, Raul-Isaac cognitive bias systemic bias halo effect availability bias status quo bias Campbell's Law metric overreliance fairness in research evaluation peer review bias <p>The document explains how the <strong>ONE Framework</strong> addresses the unintended biases that distort traditional research evaluation processes. It identifies key issues highlighted by initiatives such as <strong>DORA</strong> — including overreliance on bibliometric indicators, prestige-driven decision-making, and systemic inequities affecting early-career and interdisciplinary researchers — and demonstrates how the ONE Framework mitigates these through its <strong>cohort-based, multidimensional approach</strong>.</p> <p>The paper examines five major sources of bias in research assessment — <strong>overreliance on “objective” metrics</strong>, <strong>the halo effect</strong>, <strong>availability bias</strong>, <strong>status quo bias</strong>, and <strong>Campbell’s Law</strong> — and outlines the mechanisms by which the ONE Framework neutralizes each of them. By emphasizing <strong>contextual evaluation</strong>, <strong>data transparency</strong>, and <strong>modular weighting of indicators</strong>, ONE promotes fairness and inclusivity while maintaining analytical rigor.</p> <p>Through a structured model integrating over <strong>70 indicators</strong> across three main axes — <em>Performance</em>, <em>Interaction within the Scientific Community</em>, and <em>Interaction with Society</em> — the framework shifts the focus from prestige or volume to <strong>real, contextualized impact</strong>. It encourages evaluators to consider mentoring, collaboration, leadership, openness, and societal engagement alongside academic output.</p> <p>Ultimately, this document positions the ONE Framework as a <strong>practical implementation</strong> of the principles championed by <strong>DORA</strong>, <strong>COARA</strong>, and <strong>UNESCO’s Open Science Recommendation</strong>, turning abstract commitments to fairness and transparency into operational, data-driven tools. It invites funders, institutions, and policymakers to adopt these practices to ensure <strong>balanced, bias-aware, and equitable evaluation</strong> across all stages of research careers.</p> |
| title | How the ONE Research Community Framework Tackles Cognitive and Systemic Biases in Research Assessment |
| topic | cognitive bias systemic bias halo effect availability bias status quo bias Campbell's Law metric overreliance fairness in research evaluation peer review bias |
| url | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17271939 |