Abstract
Purpose
This article explores the implications of publication requirements for the research output of Ukrainian academics in Scopus in 1999–2019. As such it contributes to the existing body of knowledge on quantitative and qualitative effects of research evaluation policies.
Design/methodology/approach
Three metrics were chosen to analyse the implications of publication requirements for the quality of research output: publications in predatory journals, publications in local journals and publications per SNIP quartile from the disciplinary perspective.
Findings
Study results highlight, that, firstly, publications of Ukrainian authors in predatory journals rose to 1% in 2019. Secondly, the share of publications in local journals reached the peak of 47.3% in 2015. In 2019 it fell to 31.8%. Thirdly, though the total number of publications has risen dramatically since 2011, but the share of Q3+Q4 has exceeded the share of Q1+Q2. To summarise, the study findings highligh, that research evaluation policies are required to contain not only quantitative but also qualitative criteria.
Research limitation
The study does not explore in detail the effects of a particular type of publication requirements.
Practical implications
The findings of the study have practical implications for policymakers and university managers aimed to develop research evaluation policies.
Originality/value
This paper gains insights into the effects of publication requirements on the research output of Ukrainian academics in Scopus.