#researchfish

2025-04-01

ResearchFish Again

One of the things I definitely don’t miss about working in the UK university system is the dreaded Researchfish. If you’ve never heard of this bit of software, it’s intended to collect data relating to the outputs of research grants funded by the various Research Councils. That’s not an unreasonable thing to want to do, of course, but the interface is – or at least was when I last used it several years ago – extremely clunky and user-unfriendly. That meant that, once a year, along with other academics with research grants (in my case from STFC) I had to waste hours uploading bibliometric and other data by hand. A sensible system would have harvested this automatically as it is mostly available online at various locations or allowed users simply to upload their own publication list as a file; most of us keep an up-to-date list of publications for various reasons (including vanity!) anyway. Institutions also keep track of all this stuff independently. All this duplication seemed utterly pointless.

I always wondered what happened to the information I uploaded every year, which seemed to disappear without trace into the bowels of RCUK. I assume it was used for something, but mere researchers were never told to what purpose. I guess it was used to assess the performance of researchers in some way.

When I left the UK in 2018 to work full-time in Ireland, I took great pleasure in ignoring the multiple emails demanding that I do yet another Researchfish upload. The automated reminders turned into individual emails threatening that I would never again be eligible for funding if I didn’t do it, to which I eventually replied that I wouldn’t be applying for UK research grants anymore anyway. So there. Eventually the emails stopped.

Then, about three years ago, ResearchFish went from being merely pointless to downright sinister as a scandal erupted about the company that operates it (called Infotech), involving the abuse of data and the bullying of academics. I wrote about this here. It then transpired that UKRI, the umbrella organization governing the UK’s research council had been actively conniving with Infotech to target critics. An inquiry was promised but I don’t know what became of that.

Anyway, all that was a while ago and I neither longer live nor work in the UK so why mention ResearchFish again, now?

The reason is something that shocked me when I found out about it a few days ago. Researchfish is now operated by commercial publishing house Elsevier.

Words fail. I can’t be the only person to see a gigantic conflict of interest. How can a government agency allow the assessment of its research outputs to be outsourced to a company that profits hugely by the publication of those outputs? There’s a phrase in British English which I think is in fairly common usage: marking your own homework. This relates to individuals or organizations who have been given the responsibility for regulating their own products. Is very apt here.

The acquisition of Researchfish isn’t the only example of Elsevier getting its talons stuck into academia life. Elsevier also “runs” the bibliometric service Scopus which it markets as a sort of quality indicator for academic articles. I put “runs” in inverted commas because Scopus is hopelessly inaccurate and unreliable. I can certainly speak from experience on that. Nevertheless, Elsevier has managed to dupe research managers – clearly not the brightest people in the world – into thinking that Scopus is a quality product. I suppose the more you pay for something the less inclined you are to doubt its worth, because if you do find you have paid worthless junk you look like an idiot.

A few days ago I posted a piece that include this excerpt from an article in Wired:

Every industry has certain problems universally acknowledged as broken: insurance in health care, licensing in music, standardized testing in education, tipping in the restaurant business. In academia, it’s publishing. Academic publishing is dominated by for-profit giants like Elsevier and Springer. Calling their practice a form of thuggery isn’t so much an insult as an economic observation. 

With the steady encroachment of the likes of Elsevier into research assessment, it is clear that as well as raking in huge profits, the thugs are now also assuming the role of the police. The academic publishing industry is a monstrous juggernaut that is doing untold damage to research and is set to do more. It has to stop.

#bibliometrics #Elsevier #Infotech #ResearchAssessment #Researchfish #SCOPUS #UKRI

2025-03-12

It is Researchfish submission season!

It is time to tell Elsevier about all our unpublished research results in our detailed reports to our UK funders!

#researchfish #ukri #WellcomeTrust #OpenScience

Ko-Fan Chen 陳克帆kofanchen@drosophila.social
2025-03-11

#lifeofpi
I am doing my #Researchfish (#UKRI annual grant reporting system) and I am happy to report two more useful engagments on #Mastodon since 2024 March. I did mention I have a mirror/bridge on #bluesky. I also made an mistake to check out who are the fellow #drosophila researchers on there 😂😔... basically everyone

Craig Aaen Stockdaleopenwarfare@openbiblio.social
2025-02-07

@steveroyle Being owned by #Hellsevier is just another good reason not to use it, in addition to its cumbersome reporting and the fact that #Researchfish tried to get academics fired when they complained online. chemistryworld.com/news/resear

2025-02-04

Funder email:
“Information entered on Researchfish is collected on behalf of the funders and cannot be used for commercial purposes.”

Good to clarify this since #Researchfish is a product from Interfolio, who were acquired by the RELX company #Elsevier in 2022. As such they have a unique market advantage in handling data which is potentially commercially sensitive and that has been disclosed by grantees under mandate.

2024-03-14

Doing my *mandatory* outcome reporting for UK Research and Innovation today, which they have outsourced to an Elsevier service called #ResearchFish

"Use of Researchfish is now covered by the Elsevier Privacy Policy"

"In order to continue, you are required to read and agree to this policy."

2024-02-07

Unpopular opinion: #researchfish submission is not that bad.

I had 9 awards, 7 to report on. It took max 30 min to complete. It's not too tough if you put grant numbers in publications etc it gets auto-populated and reduces the hassle.

PIs love to moan about it, but actually the interface has improved a lot. Admittedly my tolerance for non-intuitive UI is high (hello, Mastodon 👋🏻).

#LifeOfPI #DontAtMe

2024-02-01

It's reporting season for UK academics funded by #UKRI. UKRI mandates use of #ResearchFish, a commercial product that was originally spun out (maybe from #MRC?) and is now owned by #Elsevier 🙃. For the first time IIRC, I will have to accept Elsevier #privacy policy when I upload my #research outcomes.

Oligopoly and massive vertical integration in this sector: in medium term, most likely to benefit #investors.

➡️ wired.com/story/tiktok-platfor
@pluralistic

➡️ royalsocietypublishing.org/doi
@brembs

Ko-Fan Chen 陳克帆kofanchen@drosophila.social
2024-01-24

I am glad to say I passed my #probation. it doesnt mean much in the current UK university climate. But at least my job is secure (for now). When I started the post in the mid of pandemic, I was rather pathemistic about this, thanks to our dept (Genetics and Genome Biology) seniors and @NeurogeneticsLeicester , I was helped all the way through from getting grants, teaching and setting up lab, recruiting lab members. #lablife #academicchatter
now it is time to do my year one #researchfish😱

Louise LocockProfLouiseL
2023-10-04

@cmsdengl To be fair it's not the work itself. It's all the soul-destroying, joy-draining research monitoring and reporting bureaucracy. The thought that I will never again have to wrestle with R&D approvals or ResearchFish makes my heart sing.
&D

Client Info

Server: https://mastodon.social
Version: 2025.04
Repository: https://github.com/cyevgeniy/lmst