Supporting reform on research assessment
Cambridge University Press and University of Cambridge Libraries and Archives unite behind NIH call for review of measuring and rewarding scientific impact.
In June 2026 the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced a call for responses on how to better align research incentives with the values of modern science, including collaboration, transparency and rigorous replication, noting that ‘current metrics of scientific success rely heavily on individual-level indicators of productivity, such as publication counts and citation metrics.’
In a joint response, Cambridge University Press and University of Cambridge Libraries and Archives strongly support NIH's effort to realign these incentives.
Monica Westin, Director of Open Policy Development, said:
“A reform of research assessment requires coordinated action across the research ecosystem, including publishers, institutions, funders and researchers. However, the changes will deliver benefits for both the scientific community and society at large.”
Urgent reform needed
The urgent need for research-assessment reform was a key finding in the Press’ recent Publishing futures report. The sector-wide review of more than 3,000 stakeholders in the scholarly research ecosystem highlighted the urgent need to evolve academic reward and recognition to prioritise quality over quantity, recognise a wider range of research outputs and contributions, and move beyond an over-reliance on narrow publication and citation metrics.
The NIH’s focus on publication and citation counts aligns with the findings of our report where existing academic reward systems worldwide still tie career advancement to the number of published journal articles.
Reward systems and metrics that use the quantity of research outputs as a proxy for quality have led to ballooning publication volumes, some of questionable quality, and increased costs across the research ecosystem.
Fixing these system-wide problems will be challenging but achievable and will depend on rethinking how we measure and reward research so that incentives align with meaningful, high-quality impact.
Monica Westin commented: "As we stated in our comment with the University Library, meaningful reform of research assessment requires coordinated action across the research ecosystem, including publishers, institutions, funders, and researchers themselves. Much of this work is already being advanced through cross-sector initiatives and we hope to see the NIH build on and contribute to these collective efforts."
“Global research publications have grown from 2.2 million in 2014 to 3.3 million in 2023. While much of this is genuine progress, the sheer volume risks overwhelming important findings.”
- Mandy Hill, Managing Director, Cambridge University Press
Championing industry initiatives
As signatories to the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), Cambridge University Press and the University of Cambridge support the NIH's focus on measurable and practical approaches that better recognise rigorous, transparent and collaborative research as laid out in DORA’s guidance:
Focus on research quality
Evaluate research based on its intrinsic quality and contribution, rather than the prestige of the publication venue or Journal Impact Factor.
Recognise diverse research outputs
Recognise the full range of research outputs, including datasets, software, protocols and other products that enable scientific progress.
Promote transparency in assessment
Establish clear and transparent criteria for funding, recruitment and career advancement.
Use metrics responsibly
Use quantitative indicators to support, not replace, expert qualitative assessment, while avoiding inappropriate reliance on institutional rankings or metrics.
Cambridge’s commitment to these principles extends beyond endorsement to active participation in their implementation. As a DORA Sustaining Organisation, the Press plays an active role in DORA’s Steering Committee and working groups, helping to turn principles into operational change.
The University Library also serves as an alternate DORA steering group member. Across the University of Cambridge, responsible research assessment has already been embedded into institutional practice, with the university’s recruitment, promotion and reward processes now placing substantially less emphasis on publication counts and journal-based metrics.
Reward FAIR Data, software and model sharing
Funding applications and research assessment should consider not only publication plans but also commitments to depositing well-documented datasets, software, computational models, and other research objects in FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) compliant repositories.
Both Cambridge University Press and the University of Cambridge actively support FAIR principles. Cambridge University Library's Research Data management programme provides institutional support for FAIR data stewardship, while the University’s open research policies promote these practices that improve the discoverability, accessibility, interoperability and long-term reuse of research outputs.
Rewarding FAIR-compliant sharing would create stronger incentives for reproducibility, secondary analysis, and cumulative scientific progress.
Collaboration and scholarly service
Our Publishing futures report also highlighted widespread concern that academic work (such as peer review, editorial service, mentoring, community leadership and stewardship of shared research infrastructure) receives insufficient recognition despite their critical importance to ecosystem-wide research quality.
Research assessment must improve recognition for collaborative contributions that are essential to maintaining a healthy research ecosystem but are often invisible within current reward systems.
The reforms we propose represent an important opportunity to shift research assessment away from quantity-based proxies and toward demonstrable scientific contributions. By adopting responsible assessment frameworks, rewarding FAIR data and software sharing, and valuing collaboration and scholarly service, NIH can accelerate a culture change that is already underway across the global research community.
“These reforms will strengthen scientific rigour, improve reproducibility, encourage openness and better align incentives with the activities that produce robust, trustworthy, and societally valuable research.”
- Monica Westin
Built with Shorthand