Time, Quality, and Integrity: Temporal Autonomy as a Missing Link in Research Assessment Reform

TL;DR

This paper explores how the pressure for speed in academia affects research quality and suggests reforms to allow more time for quality work.

Contribution

The paper introduces the concept of 'temporal autonomy' as a novel factor in reforming research assessment systems.

Findings

Researchers across Europe consistently perceive reward systems favoring speed over quality.

Questionable research practices are linked to accelerated research processes.

Incorporating 'process time' into assessments could improve research integrity.

Abstract

This paper analyses temporality and the experience of increased speed in contemporary academia and its perceived influence on knowledge production. The study is grounded in theories of acceleration-related change in academia and examines the perceived effects of accelerated research processes on contemporary knowledge production, offering insights into the widespread use of questionable research practices (QRPs). Drawing on 36 focus group interviews with 172 researchers across seven European countries, the analysis reveals strikingly consistent perceptions of current reward and merit systems in academia, transcending differences in countries, disciplines, gender, and levels of seniority. These systems are widely perceived to reward speed and quantity at the expense of quality and integrity, thereby potentially undermining the robustness of the knowledge produced. The study thus shows a need for a stronger qualitative component in the assessment system, which aligns with the aims of the ‘research assessment reform movement’ (cf. DORA, CoARA). However, this paper argues that the research assessment reform movement needs to consider temporality in its efforts to reform research assessments. A stronger focus on ‘process time’ and ‘temporal autonomy’ is recommended to ensure that researchers and research units have adequate time to carry out all research tasks while maintaining integrity.

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11948-026-00588-x.