Scholarlink

<p>The evolving nature of academic disciplines has gradually influenced the methods of research evaluation in the humanities, making it a subject of increasing debate. Given the consensus that the evaluation of humanities scientific outputs must evolve toward a stable, self-sustaining, and discipline-appropriate framework, it is imperative to examine the necessary steps toward achieving this goal. Current evaluation practices indicate that existing models and frameworks, as well as efforts to introduce new approaches, methodologies, and tools for humanities research evaluation, remain insufficient in practice. Furthermore, the emergence of novel drivers and disruptors challenges the static assumptions underlying humanities research evaluation. This study aims to identify existing and potential approaches, policies, methodologies, criteria, indicators, tools, and infrastructures that can contribute to a more suitable evaluation framework for humanities scientific outputs, both in the present and in the future. To explore the future of evaluation in the humanities in 2040, this study integrates the results of a scoping review with backcasting technique. The literature review results in a three-tier classification of transitions, requirements, and constraints shaping the future outlook of humanities research evaluation. For each category, a comprehensive representation is provided, outlining the current state and corresponding policy measures for the future, along with actionable steps necessary to achieve them. It delineates three transitions: 1. from index to impact, 2. from siloed to open science, and 3. from hardware/software to technopoly. The study also suggests 9 policies, 12 first-level actionable steps, and 28&#xa0;s-level actionable steps to materialize the suggested transitions. The recommended policies are: 1. publish and prosper culture, 2. dynamic and integrated evaluation, 3. adaptive evaluation, 4. combined governance, 5. development of evaluation intelligence, 6. outcome-process hybridization, 7. democratization of evaluation, 8. equal and unbiased opportunities, and 9. more technocracy. It also lays the groundwork for further research aimed at improving the quality of humanities research evaluation in the future.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

The future of research evaluation in the humanities: a scoping review and backcasting study

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月20日

查看全文
  • Elahe Ebrahimi Dorcheh,
  • Ali Mansouri,
  • Ali Zackery

摘要

The evolving nature of academic disciplines has gradually influenced the methods of research evaluation in the humanities, making it a subject of increasing debate. Given the consensus that the evaluation of humanities scientific outputs must evolve toward a stable, self-sustaining, and discipline-appropriate framework, it is imperative to examine the necessary steps toward achieving this goal. Current evaluation practices indicate that existing models and frameworks, as well as efforts to introduce new approaches, methodologies, and tools for humanities research evaluation, remain insufficient in practice. Furthermore, the emergence of novel drivers and disruptors challenges the static assumptions underlying humanities research evaluation. This study aims to identify existing and potential approaches, policies, methodologies, criteria, indicators, tools, and infrastructures that can contribute to a more suitable evaluation framework for humanities scientific outputs, both in the present and in the future. To explore the future of evaluation in the humanities in 2040, this study integrates the results of a scoping review with backcasting technique. The literature review results in a three-tier classification of transitions, requirements, and constraints shaping the future outlook of humanities research evaluation. For each category, a comprehensive representation is provided, outlining the current state and corresponding policy measures for the future, along with actionable steps necessary to achieve them. It delineates three transitions: 1. from index to impact, 2. from siloed to open science, and 3. from hardware/software to technopoly. The study also suggests 9 policies, 12 first-level actionable steps, and 28 s-level actionable steps to materialize the suggested transitions. The recommended policies are: 1. publish and prosper culture, 2. dynamic and integrated evaluation, 3. adaptive evaluation, 4. combined governance, 5. development of evaluation intelligence, 6. outcome-process hybridization, 7. democratization of evaluation, 8. equal and unbiased opportunities, and 9. more technocracy. It also lays the groundwork for further research aimed at improving the quality of humanities research evaluation in the future.