ABSTRACT Research publication metrics, while intended to assess research impact, have unintended consequences. Hence, this study investigated the unintended consequences of research productivity metrics on academic careers and knowledge production in global higher education using a survey of 1065 respondents. The study employed variance‐weighted least‐squares regression, multivariate analysis of variance and covariance, and robust OLS for robustness checks. The findings revealed five main results: (1) unintended consequences of research productivity metrics, including institutional emphasis on publication metrics, pressure to publish in high‐impact journals, and burnout or stress, adversely affect academic careers in terms of career progression, work‐life balance, and stress or burnout; (2) metric‐related pressures negatively affect research quality and innovation by influencing research quality and rigour, encouraging the prioritization of topics with high citation potential, and constraining decisions to adopt innovative research methods and conduct innovative research; (3) the same pressures increase the volume of knowledge production by shaping the type of research conducted, encouraging the prioritization of citation‐oriented topics, and influencing decisions to share research findings openly; (4) the effects of these pressures do not significantly differ by gender; and (5) institutional policies aimed at reducing stress, supporting work‐life balance, and alleviating pressure caused by research metrics are effective in reducing the negative effects associated with research productivity metrics.
Luo et al. (Thu,) studied this question.