Purpose - This paper aims to question the dominance of citation metrics in the evaluation of the impact of research and prompt debate on how to evaluate impact in different contexts. Design/methodology/approach - The paper takes the form of a viewpoint and review of how metrics are used currently and presents recommendations for change. Findings - Whilst recognising the continued relevance and importance of citation as a measure of impact, the paper highlights how this measure overshadows all other types of impact (on practice, teaching, public policy, society) and, in turn, has the potential to distort academic research practice. Research limitations/implications - Additional research should follow to identify other methods of evaluating research impact with a specific emphasis on the development of usage metrics. Practical implications - The paper calls on all parties within the research dissemination process (academics, publishers, funding bodies) to formulate new ways of evaluating research. Originality/value - The paper challenges current thinking on how to evaluate research and makes a number of recommendations, specifically around article usage. © Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Mendeley saves you time finding and organizing research
Choose a citation style from the tabs below