IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jpubli/v12y2024i1p4-d1333783.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Quality Matter? Quality Assurance in Research for the Chilean Higher Education System

Author

Listed:
  • Elizabeth Troncoso

    (Office of Research, Universidad Tecnológica Metropolitana, Santiago 8320000, Chile
    Programa Institucional de Fomento a la I+D+i, Universidad Tecnológica Metropolitana, Santiago 8320000, Chile)

  • Daniel A. López

    (Instituto Interuniversitario de Investigación Educativa IESED-Chile, Universidad de Los Lagos, Santiago 8320000, Chile)

  • René Ruby-Figueroa

    (Programa Institucional de Fomento a la I+D+i, Universidad Tecnológica Metropolitana, Santiago 8320000, Chile)

  • Dieter Koch

    (Department of Social Work, Faculty of Humanities and Social Communication Technology, Universidad Tecnológica Metropolitana, Santiago 8320000, Chile)

  • Ricardo Reich

    (Independent Researcher, Santiago 8320000, Chile)

Abstract

This study analyzes the research quality assurance processes in Chilean universities. Data from 29 universities accredited by the National Accreditation Commission were collected. The relationship between institutional accreditation and research performance was analyzed using length in years of institutional accreditation and eight research metrics used as the indicators of quantity, quality, and impact of a university’s outputs at an international level. The results showed that quality assurance in research of Chilean universities is mainly associated with quantity and not with the quality and impact of academic publications. There was also no relationship between the number of publications and their quality, even finding cases with negative correlations. In addition to the above, the relationship between international metrics to evaluate research performance (i.e., international collaboration, field-weighted citation impact, and output in the top 10% citation percentiles) showed the existence of three clusters of heterogeneous composition regarding the distribution of universities with different years of institutional accreditation. These findings call for a new focus on improving regulatory processes to evaluate research performance and adequately promote institutions’ development and the effectiveness of their mission.

Suggested Citation

  • Elizabeth Troncoso & Daniel A. López & René Ruby-Figueroa & Dieter Koch & Ricardo Reich, 2024. "Does Quality Matter? Quality Assurance in Research for the Chilean Higher Education System," Publications, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-20, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:12:y:2024:i:1:p:4-:d:1333783
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/12/1/4/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/12/1/4/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benavente, José Miguel & Crespi, Gustavo & Figal Garone, Lucas & Maffioli, Alessandro, 2012. "The impact of national research funds: A regression discontinuity approach to the Chilean FONDECYT," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1461-1475.
    2. Henk F. Moed, 2008. "UK Research Assessment Exercises: Informed judgments on research quality or quantity?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 74(1), pages 153-161, January.
    3. Aldieri, Luigi & Kotsemir, Maxim & Vinci, Concetto Paolo, 2018. "The impact of research collaboration on academic performance: An empirical analysis for some European countries," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 13-30.
    4. Francisco Collazo-Reyes, 2014. "Growth of the number of indexed journals of Latin America and the Caribbean: the effect on the impact of each country," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 197-209, January.
    5. Boris Forthmann & Mark Leveling & Yixiao Dong & Denis Dumas, 2020. "Investigating the quantity–quality relationship in scientific creativity: an empirical examination of expected residual variance and the tilted funnel hypothesis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(3), pages 2497-2518, September.
    6. Adam G. Pfleegor & Matthew Katz & Matthew T. Bowers, 2019. "Publish, Perish, or Salami Slice? Authorship Ethics in an Emerging Field," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 156(1), pages 189-208, April.
    7. Rinze Benedictus & Frank Miedema & Mark W. J. Ferguson, 2016. "Fewer numbers, better science," Nature, Nature, vol. 538(7626), pages 453-455, October.
    8. Pablo Astudillo Besnier, 2014. "Chile needs better science governance and support," Nature, Nature, vol. 511(7510), pages 385-385, July.
    9. Richard Van Noorden, 2010. "Metrics: A profusion of measures," Nature, Nature, vol. 465(7300), pages 864-866, June.
    10. Diana Hicks & Paul Wouters & Ludo Waltman & Sarah de Rijcke & Ismael Rafols, 2015. "Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics," Nature, Nature, vol. 520(7548), pages 429-431, April.
    11. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Marco Solazzi, 2011. "The relationship between scientists’ research performance and the degree of internationalization of their research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(3), pages 629-643, March.
    12. Demir, Selcuk Besir, 2018. "Predatory journals: Who publishes in them and why?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 1296-1311.
    13. James Wilsdon, 2015. "We need a measured approach to metrics," Nature, Nature, vol. 523(7559), pages 129-129, July.
    14. Joost Kosten, 2016. "A classification of the use of research indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(1), pages 457-464, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Elizabeth Troncoso & Francisco Ganga-Contreras & Margarita Briceño, 2022. "Incentive Policies for Scientific Publications in the State Universities of Chile," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-19, June.
    2. Mariani, Manuel Sebastian & Medo, Matúš & Zhang, Yi-Cheng, 2016. "Identification of milestone papers through time-balanced network centrality," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 1207-1223.
    3. Marco Cozzi, 2020. "Public Funding of Research and Grant Proposals in the Social Sciences: Empirical Evidence from Canada," Department Discussion Papers 1809, Department of Economics, University of Victoria.
    4. Eliseo Reategui & Alause Pires & Michel Carniato & Sergio Roberto Kieling Franco, 2020. "Evaluation of Brazilian research output in education: confronting international and national contexts," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 427-444, October.
    5. Eugenio Petrovich, 2022. "Bibliometrics in Press. Representations and uses of bibliometric indicators in the Italian daily newspapers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2195-2233, May.
    6. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Myroslava Hladchenko, 2023. "Assessing the effects of publication requirements for professorship on research performance and publishing behaviour of Ukrainian academics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(8), pages 4589-4609, August.
    7. Yuret, Tolga, 2017. "Do researchers pay attention to publication subsidies?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 423-434.
    8. Alessandro Margherita & Gianluca Elia & Claudio Petti, 2022. "What Is Quality in Research? Building a Framework of Design, Process and Impact Attributes and Evaluation Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-18, March.
    9. Rafols, Ismael & Stirling, Andy, 2020. "Designing indicators for opening up evaluation. Insights from research assessment," SocArXiv h2fxp, Center for Open Science.
    10. Rojko, Katarina & Lužar, Borut, 2022. "Scientific performance across research disciplines: Trends and differences in the case of Slovenia," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    11. Torger Möller & Marion Schmidt & Stefan Hornbostel, 2016. "Assessing the effects of the German Excellence Initiative with bibliometric methods," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 2217-2239, December.
    12. Mark Bukowski & Sandra Geisler & Thomas Schmitz-Rode & Robert Farkas, 2020. "Feasibility of activity-based expert profiling using text mining of scientific publications and patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(2), pages 579-620, May.
    13. Raminta Pranckutė, 2021. "Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-59, March.
    14. Miguel-Angel Vera-Baceta & Michael Thelwall & Kayvan Kousha, 2019. "Web of Science and Scopus language coverage," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(3), pages 1803-1813, December.
    15. Luciano Rossoni & Rodrigo Assunção Rosa, 2024. "Reducing the Matthew Effect on Journal Citations through an Inclusive Indexing Logic: The Brazilian Spell (Scientific Periodicals Electronic Library) Experience," Publications, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-24, February.
    16. Confraria, Hugo & Mira Godinho, Manuel & Wang, Lili, 2017. "Determinants of citation impact: A comparative analysis of the Global South versus the Global North," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 265-279.
    17. Loet Leydesdorff & Paul Wouters & Lutz Bornmann, 2016. "Professional and citizen bibliometrics: complementarities and ambivalences in the development and use of indicators—a state-of-the-art report," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 2129-2150, December.
    18. Bryce, Cormac & Dowling, Michael & Lucey, Brian, 2020. "The journal quality perception gap," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(5).
    19. Domingo Docampo & Lawrence Cram, 2019. "Highly cited researchers: a moving target," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 1011-1025, March.
    20. Michaela Strinzel & Josh Brown & Wolfgang Kaltenbrunner & Sarah Rijcke & Michael Hill, 2021. "Ten ways to improve academic CVs for fairer research assessment," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-4, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:12:y:2024:i:1:p:4-:d:1333783. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.