Responsible researcher evaluation
The RCF grants funding based on open competition and international peer review. The focus of the review of applications is on the research plan, but in RCF funding opportunities aimed specifically at individual researchers, researcher assessment is also key.
The RCF follows responsible practices in all research funding activities, taking into account disqualification and confidentiality, equality and nondiscrimination, open science and sustainable development.
This policy is supported by our commitment to both international and national declarations on research and researcher assessment. such as the Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), the international Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment (CoARA) and the national recommendation on responsible researcher evaluation in Finland (PDF).
We follow the principles of responsible assessment (PDF).
The fundamental principles of responsible assessment are transparency, integrity, equity, competence and diversity. Our review process and criteria and our decision criteria are described openly in the application guidelines and call texts, and they are freely accessible to all.
In decision-making, we also take into account the many different career paths of researchers, the impact of research and the promotion of open access. The criteria and policies guiding the funding decisions are made available on our website before calls are opened.
Quality over quantity
In keeping with the principles of responsible researcher evaluation, researchers’ merits are assessed through a wide range of outputs and research career roles. The review places emphasis on the scientific content and quality of publications. A major focus in reviewing applications is to evaluate the quality of the research plan and the applicant’s competence, not quantitative indicators such as citation or journal-based metrics. For example, the use of journal-based metrics in the assessment is prohibited (e.g. journal impact factors (JIF) or JUFO classifications).
We do not consider that citation metrics comprehensively describe the applicant’s competence nor the impact, relevance or quality of a publication or publications. Using metrics to support the review is not prohibited, but we emphasise in our guidelines that metrics use must be responsible and mindful of the problems associated with it. Citation metrics is dependent on the citation practices of different scientific disciplines. Therefore, it is not a reliably comparable indicator in review panels, which are often multidisciplinary.
We have adopted the CV template of the Finnish National Board on Research Integrity, which makes the researcher’s research outputs more visible in the review and decision-making process. Career breaks are also taken into account when assessing merits. These principles are considered throughout our funding process. When applying for Academy Research Fellowships, applicants shall include in their CVs a narrative section to describe how the funding would support career progress towards more demanding research positions and towards achieving an established position in the research community.
We provide reviewers and our decision-makers with orientation and guidance on the principles of responsible evaluation.
