Gavin Little

Journal Publishing, Journal Reputation, and the United Kingdom's Research Assessment Exercise

Many academic lawyers believe that the Research Assessment Exercise has encouraged writing for academic journals, often at the expense of other forms of scholarly discourse. Moreover, it is widely perceived that the reputation of the journal in which research is published affects how that research is assessed in connection with the RAE. In this article, the authors report data gathered from a large-scale study measuring the perceptions of academic lawyers concerning the journal publishing process, how the RAE has affected journal quality generally, and how specific journals rank in terms of academic quality and their perceived importance to the RAE process.

The Perceptions of Academic Lawyers Concerning the Effects of the United Kingdom`s Research Assessment Exercise

In this article, the authors analyse quantitative and qualitative data compiled from a large-scale postal survey of legal academics concerning the United Kingdom`s Research Assessment Exercise. The purpose of the study was to measure the attitudes of academic lawyers affected by the RAE rating process and institutional responses to that process. The study reveals that a substantial number of respondents lack faith in the objectivity of the rating process, believe institutional responses to the RAE have caused damage to academic working environments, and perceive that the RAE has failed to improve the quality of legal research.