Comprehensive Researcher Evaluation Model: Lessons from the world

Purpose: This study aims to reconstruct researcher evaluation metrics by synthesizing global scientific literature and proposing a Comprehensive Researcher Evaluation Model (CREM). The objective is to provide a more holistic framework for assessing researchers’ commitment, capabilities, and contributions beyond traditional evaluation measures.

Methodology: The research employs a meta-synthesis approach, analyzing 111 international scientific sources. By reviewing and integrating lessons from global experiences, the study identifies key principles and criteria for developing a comprehensive researcher evaluation framework.

Findings: The findings highlight the limitations and risks of relying solely on traditional metrics, such as citation counts, for evaluating researchers. The study introduces restorative metrics that provide a more balanced and comprehensive assessment of scholarly performance. It proposes a five-level evaluation model based on four dimensions: Attitudinal, Insightful, Behavioral, and Institutional. The results emphasize that research performance emerges from the interaction between individual characteristics and the surrounding research ecosystem, and therefore should be assessed by knowledgeable peers within the relevant context.

Conclusion: The study concludes that effective researcher evaluation should move beyond conventional quantitative indicators and adopt a multidimensional perspective. Academic work is considered truly valuable when it contributes to theoretical advancement or economic development in the medium term and promotes social welfare and global progress in the long term. The proposed CREM framework offers a more comprehensive and context-sensitive approach to evaluating researchers and their impact.