Indicators and Metrics in SSH Research

How Scholars Value Publication Practices in the Face of Epistemic Capitalism

Abstract

Situated at the level of individual researchers, this paper extends empirical research on indicators, metrics and other forms of quantification in everyday (research) practice to the social sciences and humanities (SSH). I draw on 46 qualitative in-depth interviews with senior researchers and early career researchers in history, political science and area studies to trace how SSH scholars value publication practices and outputs. Building on approaches from valuation studies (Helgesson & Muniesa, 2013) three registers of valuing (Heuts & Mol, 2013) are identified: an epistemic, a reputational and an institutional register of valuing publication practices. By exploring overlaps and relations between the three registers, folded valuations (Helgesson, 2016) and their mobilization in different valuation constellations (Waibel et al., 2021), I investigate the role of indicators, metrics and other forms of quantification. Results show that epistemic practice in SSH fields is permeated with indicator use. On the one hand indicators and metrics are a means to denote relevance across the three registers in everyday practice. On the other hand, output-oriented research cultures rely on socio-technical practices of quantification to promote “research quality” and “research excellence”, as such practices are closely related to the epistemic and organizational practices that constitute epistemic capitalism (Fochler, 2016). The paper concludes with implications for reforms of research assessment (CoARA, 2022) and how this relates to reforming contemporary research cultures more generally.