San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA)¶
American Society for Cell Biology. (2013). San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA).
Cited by¶
2 citations across 2 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Salience-as-Significance
- Search engines have invested heavily in visibility and gap-measurement through quality-rating panels; mass media has historically leaned on changing the cue with mixed results; academic communities are slowly working on changing the reading through declarations against prestige-as-quality.
This sourceA collective declaration against using journal-based metrics (impact factor, prestige) as surrogates for research quality — an instance of changing the downstream reading.
Supported in partVerified against the work's full text
DORA supports the academic-community clause: a declaration against using journal prestige metrics as a proxy for research quality. It says nothing on search engines or mass media.
“Do not use journal-based metrics, such as Journal Impact Factors, as a surrogate measure of the quality of individual research articles”
- Search engines have invested heavily in visibility and gap-measurement through quality-rating panels; mass media has historically leaned on changing the cue with mixed results; academic communities are slowly working on changing the reading through declarations against prestige-as-quality.
Domain-specific¶
- McNamara fallacy
- . Software engineering — velocity, story points, lines of code, and test-coverage as the operative metrics of "metric-driven" engineering cultures. Academic assessment — citation counts, the h-index, and impact factor as proxies for research quality; the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) is the fallacy applied to research-evaluation metrics
This sourceDORA's recommendation against using journal-based metrics such as the Journal Impact Factor as a surrogate measure of the quality of research in hiring, promotion and funding decisions.
Supported in partVerified against a saved copy of the source
“The Journal Impact Factor is frequently used as the primary parameter with which to compare the scientific output of individuals and institutions.”
- . Software engineering — velocity, story points, lines of code, and test-coverage as the operative metrics of "metric-driven" engineering cultures. Academic assessment — citation counts, the h-index, and impact factor as proxies for research quality; the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) is the fallacy applied to research-evaluation metrics
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 2 of 2 citations: 2 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:e499aec35cfc · see in the full table