Ingvild Reymert

• Reymert, Ingvild S & Thune, Taran Mari (2022). Task complementarity in academic work: a study of the relationship between research, education and third mission tasks among university professors. Journal of Technology Transfer. doi: 10.1007/s10961-021-09916-8.
• Langfeldt, Liv; Reymert, Ingvild S & Aksnes, Dag W. (2020). The role of metrics in peer assessments. Research Evaluation. doi: 10.1093/reseval/rvaa032. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Metrics on scientific publications and their citations are easily accessible and are often referred to in assessments of research and researchers. This paper addresses whether metrics are considered a legitimate and integral part of such assessments. Based on an extensive questionnaire survey in three countries, the opinions of researchers are analysed. We provide comparisons across academic fields (cardiology, economics, and physics) and contexts for assessing research (identifying the best research in their field, assessing grant proposals and assessing candidates for positions). A minority of the researchers responding to the survey reported that metrics were reasons for considering something to be the best research. Still, a large majority in all the studied fields indicated that metrics were important or partly important in their review of grant proposals and assessments of candidates for academic positions. In these contexts, the citation impact of the publications and, particularly, the number of publications were emphasized. These findings hold across all fields analysed, still the economists relied more on productivity measures than the cardiologists and the physicists. Moreover, reviewers with high scores on bibliometric indicators seemed more frequently (than other reviewers) to adhere to metrics in their assessments. Hence, when planning and using peer review, one should be aware that reviewers—in particular reviewers who score high on metrics—find metrics to be a good proxy for the future success of projects and candidates, and rely on metrics in their evaluation procedures despite the concerns in scientific communities on the use and misuse of publication metrics.

• Reymert, Ingvild S; Jungblut, Jens Patrick Wilhelm & Borlaug, Siri Brorstad (2020). Are evaluative cultures national or global? A cross-national study on evaluative cultures in academic recruitment processes in Europe. Higher Education. doi: 10.1007/s10734-020-00659-3. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Studies on academic recruitment processes have demonstrated that universities evaluate candidates for research positions using multiple criteria. However, most studies on preferences regarding evaluative criteria in recruitment processes focus on a single country, while cross-country studies are rare. Additionally, though studies have documented how fields evaluate candidates differently, those differences have not been deeply explored, thus creating a need for further inquiry. This paper aims to address this gap and investigates whether academics in two fields across five European countries prefer the same criteria to evaluate candidates for academic positions. The analysis is based on recent survey data drawn from academics in economics and physics in Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and the UK. Our results show that the academic fields have different evaluative cultures and that researchers from different fields prefer specific criteria when assessing candidates. We also found that these field-specific preferences were to some extent mediated through national frameworks such as funding systems.

• Reymert, Ingvild S (2020). Bibliometrics in academic recruitment: A screening tool rather than a game changer. Minerva. doi: 10.1007/s11024-020-09419-0. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  This paper investigates the use of metrics to recruit professors for academic positions. We analyzed confidential reports with candidate evaluations in economics, sociology, physics, and informatics at the University of Oslo between 2000 and 2017. These unique data enabled us to explore how metrics were applied in these evaluations in relation to other assessment criteria. Despite being important evaluation criteria, metrics were seldom the most salient criteria in candidate evaluations. Moreover, metrics were applied chiefly as a screening tool to decrease the number of eligible candidates and not as a replacement for peer review. Contrary to the literature suggesting an escalation of metrics, we foremost detected stable assessment practices with only a modestly increased reliance on metrics. In addition, the use of metrics proved strongly dependent on disciplines where the disciplines applied metrics corresponding to their evaluation cultures. These robust evaluation practices provide an empirical example of how core university processes are chiefly characterized by path-dependency mechanisms, and only moderately by isomorphism. Additionally, the disciplinary-dependent spread of metrics offers a theoretical illustration of how travelling standards such as metrics are not only diffused but rather translated to fit the local context, resulting in heterogeneity and context-dependent spread.

• Frølich, Nicoline; Trondal, Jarle; Caspersen, Joakim & Reymert, Ingvild S (2019). Reformer i UH-sektoren. Det muliges kunst. In Knudsen, Jon Paschen & Lauvdal, Torunn (Ed.), Geografi, kunnskap, vitenskap: Den regionale UH-sektorens framvekst og betydning. Cappelen Damm Akademisk. p. 75–98. doi: 10.23865/noasp.73. Full text in Research Archive
• Kyvik, Svein & Reymert, Ingvild (2017). Research collaboration in groups and networks: differences across academic fields. Scientometrics. 113(2), p. 951–967. doi: 10.1007/s11192-017-2497-5. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  The purpose of this paper is to give a macro-picture of collaboration in research groups and networks across all academic fields in Norwegian research universities, and to examine the relative importance of membership in groups and networks for individual publication output. To our knowledge, this is a new approach, which may provide valuable information on collaborative patterns in a particular national system, but of clear relevance to other national university systems. At the system level, conducting research in groups and networks are equally important, but there are large differences between academic fields. The research group is clearly most important in the field of medicine and health, while undertaking research in an international network is most important in the natural sciences. Membership in a research group and active participation in international networks are likely to enhance publication productivity and the quality of research.

• Vabø, Agnete; Alvsvåg, Aina; Kyvik, Svein & Reymert, Ingvild S (2016). The establishment of formal research groups in higher education institutions. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy. p. 1–12. doi: 10.3402/nstep.v2.33896. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  This article explores the significance for academic staff members of research groups established and formalised as part of research strategies at university faculties. It also explores the levels of participation and stresses the importance of such group-related activities with regard to the level of participation, perceived impact on research quality and researcher training. The study is based on data from a survey and in-depth interviews with academic staff at Norwegian universities as well as document reviews. It provides evidence that formalised research groups can have a positive effect on the quality of individual research as well as researcher training. The study reveals significant differences between fields of science with regard to the importance of such groups for research activities and quality. Nevertheless, it finds that they contribute to more institution-based research, and also in subjects and qualifications where the research has primarily been conducted on an individual basis, such as in the humanities. These groups cannot simply be understood as a legitimating device for scientific communities due to changing funding and steering criteria; rather they manifest themselves as modes of academic work serving as a supplement to, rather than substitute for, other forms of cooperation.

• Thune, Taran Mari; Reymert, Ingvild; Gulbrandsen, Magnus & Aamodt, Per O (2016). Universities and external engagement activities: Particular profiles for particular universities? Science and Public Policy. 43(6), p. 774–786. doi: 10.1093/scipol/scw019. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  We use a multilevel regression approach on a complex combined dataset including a survey of 4,400 Norwegian academics and detailed data on the 31 higher education institutions in which they are employed. The aim is to test whether university-level characteristics matter for participation in different kinds of external engagement, when we also control for the influence of individual- and discipline-level factors. We find that university-level variables explain few of the differences in external engagement among academic staff in general.

• Frølich, Nicoline; Trondal, Jarle; Caspersen, Joakim & Reymert, Ingvild (2016). Managing mergers – governancing institutional integration. Tertiary Education and Management. 22(3), p. 231–248. doi: 10.1080/13583883.2016.1196235. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Despite striking similarities, the adoption and implementation of policy shifts regarding higher education governance vary considerably across the globe, suggesting a mixed picture of diversification and isomorphism both within and across national higher education systems. By unpacking one particular structural reform process, this paper focuses on mergers as both a governance tool and a governance result in higher education. The paper analyzes the strategic decisions taken by Norwegian higher education institutions during 2014 in the light of a proposed national reform to merge institutions in order to enhance quality in higher education. The empirical basis of the paper consists of analyses of the commissioned self-evaluations of the higher education institutions, and the strategic choices and dilemmas they expressed. The process can be seen as organizational engineering in the sense that it emerges from the selfevaluation process, but is also subject to governancing on the part of the ministry.

• Aardal, Bernt; Reymert , Ingvild Stakkevold & Otterbekk, Stine Renate (2010). Trenden er brutt - færre skifter parti. Samfunnsspeilet : Tidsskrift om levekår og livsstil. p. 24–32.

View all works in Cristin

• Langfeldt, Liv; Ingeborgrud, Lina; Reymert, Ingvild; Svartefoss, Silje Marie & Borlaug, Siri Brorstad (2022). Evaluation of the Spark pilot: Identifying novel and unconventional research by doubleblinded peer review. Nordic Institute for studies in Innovation, Research and Education NIFU.
• Segaard, Signe Bock & Reymert, Ingvild S (2022). Public and publicly funded cultural institutions: Challenges of paid and voluntary work in cultural institutions, cultural professional quality and privacy protection in volunteering. Senter for forskning på sivilsamfunn og frivillig sektor. Rapport(2022:4). Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  This report analyzes six types of cultural institutions - library, museum, performing arts, music, visual arts and archives – and targets three main topics: 1) paid versus voluntary work in cultural institutions, 2) ensuring cultural professional quality in voluntary work through exchange of experiences and networks, and 3) how cultural institutions manage privacy regulations and personal data in their voluntary work. These three topics are not randomly selected but identified in interviews with managers and employees and volunteers at cultural institutions in prior projects related to this report. The report draws on data from an electronic survey sent to the entire population of public and publicly funded cultural institutions within the six type of cultural institutions. In addition to offer new knowledge about these topics in cultural institutions, the report aims to contribute to policy development for cultural institutions and government. Moreover, the report intends to identify knowledge gap that should be examined by future studies.

• Reymert, Ingvild S (2021). Controlling the Future of Academe: Academic and Managerial Logics in Professorial Recruitment. Samfunnsvitenskapelig fakultet, Universitetet i Oslo.
• Tellmann, Silje Maria; Ulvestad, Marte E. S.; Reymert, Ingvild S; Gunnes, Hebe & Larsen, Even Hellan (2019). Karriere og arbeidsvilkår i norsk akademia : Resultater fra en survey blant vitenskapelig ansatte. Nordisk institutt for studier av innovasjon, forskning og utdanning NIFU .
• Frølich, Nicoline; Wendt, Kaja Kathrine; Reymert, Ingvild S; Tellmann, Silje Maria; Elken, Mari & Kyvik, Svein [Show all 8 contributors for this article] (2018). Academic career structures in Europe : Perspectives from Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, the Netherlands, Austria and the UK. Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education (NIFU). Show summary

  The higher education sector is increasingly important to society and national economies. Recruitment to academic positions, academic career prospects, and working conditions are critical issues in this regard. Importantly, academic career structures are characterised by different principles for organising academic careers which show distinct national variations. Currently the Norwegian academic career system is under discussion and the Ministry of Education and Research has appointed an expert committee (the Underdal committee) to consider the strengths and weaknesses of the Norwegian academic career system, whether changes are necessary, and to provide recommendations for improvement.

• Støren, Liv Anne; Nesje, Kjersti; Salvanes, Kari Vea; Arnesen, Clara Åse & Reymert, Ingvild S (2018). Kompetanseutnyttelse blant mastere to–tre år etter eksamen : Resultater fra Spesialkandidatundersøkelsen 2017. Nordisk institutt for studier av innovasjon, forskning og utdanning NIFU . Show summary

  Denne rapporten presenterer resultater fra en spørreundersøkelse blant personer som fullførte en mastergrad eller tilsvarende i 2014. De var utdannet i humanistiske og estetiske fag, samfunnsfag og juss, økonomisk-administrative og naturvitenskapelige og tekniske fag. Undersøkelsen ble foretatt vinteren/våren 2017, og kartlegger arbeidsmarkedssituasjonen to–tre år etter fullført utdanning. Hovedformål er å belyse hvordan kompetansen til relativt nyutdannede mastere blir benyttet i arbeidslivet. Dette blir belyst gjennom flere innfallsvinkler. Vi ser på omfang på mistilpasning (arbeidsledighet, irrelevant arbeid og undersysselsetting), samt en rekke ulike indikatorer på hvordan kandidatene selv vurderer utdanningens kvalitet og relevans i lys av den erfaringen de har fått i løpet av de første årene i arbeidslivet.

• Reymert, Ingvild; Nesje, Kjersti & Thune, Taran Mari (2017). Doktorgradskandidater i Norge: Forskeropplæring, arbeidsvilkår og karriereforventninger . Nordisk institutt for studier av innovasjon, forskning og utdanning NIFU. Show summary

  Hensikten med rapporten er å gi et oppdatert bilde av hvordan det er å være doktorgradskandidat i Norge våren 2017, og sammenlikne utviklingen over tid. Målet er å gi alle dem som jobber for å planlegge, gjennomføre eller følge opp norsk forskeropplæring, et oppdatert og representativt kunnskapsgrunnlag om målgruppen

• Høst, Håkon & Reymert, Ingvild (2017). Modeller for fagopplæring for voksne innvandrere. NIFU Nordisk institutt for studier av innovasjon, forskning og utdanning NIFU.
• Elken, Mari; Frølich, Nicoline & Reymert, Ingvild (2016). Steering approaches in higher education: Comparing Norway, Sweden, Finland, the Netherlands and UK (England. Nordisk institutt for studier av innovasjon, forskning og utdanning. Show summary

  This report was commissioned by the Danish Ministry of Higher Education and Science and examines steering approaches in five European countries in light of recent trends in higher education governance and steering.

• Reymert, Ingvild; Aamodt, Per O; Børing, Pål & Næss, Terje (2016). Hvordan ser arbeidslivet på kandidater fra Universitetet i Oslo? Resultater fra en undersøkelse i et utvalg virksomheter i 2016. Nordisk institutt for studier av innovasjon, forskning og utdanning NIFU. Show summary

  På oppdrag fra Universitetet i Oslo (UiO) har NIFU gjennomført en undersøkelse blant et utvalg arbeidsgivere for å finne ut hvem som ansetter kandidater fra UiO eller andre læresteder, og hvorfor. Undersøkelsen belyser også hvilke kandidatgrupper som ansettes, og hvordan virksomhetene vurderer deres kvalifikasjoner. Formålet med undersøkelsen er blant annet å framskaffe informasjon til bruk i rekruttering av nye studenter, i informasjonsarbeid og karriereveiledning overfor studentene og som grunnlag for å forbedre UiOs utdanningskvalitet.

• Støren, Liv Anne; Salvanes, Kari Vea; Reymert, Ingvild; Arnesen, Clara Åse & Wiers-Jenssen, Jannecke (2016). Kandidatundersøkelsen 2015: I hvor stor grad er nyutdannede mastere berørt av nedgangskonjunkturen? Nordisk institutt for studier av innovasjon, forskning og utdanning NIFU.
• Stensaker, Bjørn; Vabø, Agnete & Reymert, Ingvild (2016). Organisasjonsstrukturen ved Universitetet i Stavanger – synspunkter fra de ansatte. Nordisk institutt for studier av innovasjon, forskning og utdanning NIFU.
• Stensaker, Bjørn; Vabø, Agnete & Reymert, Ingvild (2016). Evaluering av ordningen med fakultets- og instituttstyrer ved Universitetet i Stavanger. Nordisk institutt for studier av innovasjon, forskning og utdanning NIFU.
• Hovdhaugen, Elisabeth; Aamodt, Per O; Reymert, Ingvild & Stensaker, Bjørn (2016). Indikatorer på kvalitet i høyere utdanning. Nordisk institutt for studier av innovasjon, forskning og utdanning NIFU.
• Reymert, Ingvild; Hjellbrekke, Johannes; Aamodt, Per O & Frølich, Nicoline (2015). Skillelinjer i universitets- og høgskolesektoren: Et eksplorerende notat. Nordisk institutt for studier av innovasjon, forskning og utdanning.
• Kyvik, Svein; Reymert, Ingvild; Vabø, Agnete & Alvsvåg, Aina (2015). Forskergrupper i universitets- og høgskolesektoren. NIFU Nordisk institutt for studier av innovasjon, forskning og utdanning.
• Waagene, Erica & Reymert , Ingvild Stakkevold (2015). Metodenotat: Dokumentasjon av data fra spørreskjemaundersøkelsen til fast vitenskapelig ansatte i U&H-sektoren våren 2013 – Revidert og utvidet utgave. NIFU Nordisk institutt for studier av innovasjon, forskning og utdanning.
• Aardal, Bernt; Berglund, Frode & Reymert, Ingvild S (2011). Valgundersøkelse 2009. Dokumentasjonsrapport. Statistisk sentralbyrå.
• Reymert , Ingvild Stakkevold (2011). Høyrepopulister uten kvinneappell: Hvorfor færre kvinner enn menn stemmer på høyrepopulistiske partier i Europa. Universitet i Oslo.

View all works in Cristin

• Reymert, Ingvild S; Jungblut, Jens & Borlaug, Siri Brorstad (2021). Correction to: Are evaluative cultures national or global? A cross‑national study on evaluative cultures in academic recruitment processes in Europe (Higher Education, (2021), 82, 5, (823-843), 10.1007/s10734-020-00659-3). Higher Education. 82(5). doi: 10.1007/s10734-021-00686-8.
• Reymert, Ingvild S; Thune, Taran Mari & Borlaug, Siri Brorstad (2021). Både norske og utenlandske forskere er aktive samfunnsdebattanter . Morgenbladet.
• Langfeldt, Liv; Aksnes, Dag W. & Reymert, Ingvild S (2021). Peer review for academic jobs and grants continues to be shaped by metrics, especially if your reviewer is highly ranked. LSE Impact Blog.
• Vabø, Agnete; Reymert, Ingvild S; Borlaug, Siri Brorstad & Jungblut, Jens Patrick Wilhelm (2021). Barriers to recruitment to academic positions.
• Reymert, Ingvild S (2020). How important are bibliometrics in academic recruitment processes? Show summary

  In a newly published paper in Minerva I have analyzed confidential reports from professor recruitments in four disciplines at the University of Oslo. In the paper I show how bibliometrics are used as a screening tool and not as a replacement for more traditional qualitative evaluation of candidates.

• Reymert, Ingvild S (2020). Tellekanter som sorteringsverktøy. Morgenbladet.
• Reymert, Ingvild S; Jungblut, Jens & Borlaug, Siri Brorstad (2019). National or global standards? A cross-national study on assessment criteria in academic recruitment processes in Europe.
• Reymert, Ingvild S (2019). Is the Metrics Tide Exaggerated? .
• Reymert, Ingvild S (2019). Is the Metrics Tide Exaggerated? .
• Reymert, Ingvild S; Tveit, Mari Sundli; Bakke, Anne Helene & Strisland, Jonas (2018). Hvor blir det av kvinnene? . [Internet]. Studentsnakk / Podcast Norsk studentorganiasjon.
• Reymert, Ingvild S (2018). Ensidig rekruttering skyver ut uortodokse forskere. Forskerforum.no.
• Reymert, Ingvild S (2018). Fagskoler.
• Reymert, Ingvild S (2018). Doktorgradskandidater i Norge: Forskeropplæring, arbeidsvilkår og karriereforventninger.
• Reymert, Ingvild S (2018). Hvor blir det av postdoktorene?
• Reymert, Ingvild S (2018). Quality in recruitment processes.
• Reymert, Ingvild S (2018). Quality in recruitment processes.
• Reymert, Ingvild S (2018). Quality in recruitment processes.
• Reymert, Ingvild S (2017). Arbeidsgiverundersøkelser.
• Reymert, Ingvild S & Aamodt, Per O (2017). Graduate’s and employer survey.
• Reymert, Ingvild S & Thune, Taran Mari (2017). Jack of all trades.
• Reymert, Ingvild S & Kyvik, Svein (2017). Research collaboration in groups and networks. Differences across academic fields.
• Reymert, Ingvild S (2017). Doktorgradskandidater i Norge: Forskeropplæring, arbeidsvilkår og karriereforventninger.
• Reymert, Ingvild S (2017). Modeller for fagopplæring for voksne innvandrere.
• Reymert, Ingvild S (2017). Doktorgradskandidater i Norge: Forskeropplæring, arbeidsvilkår og karriereforventninger.
• Reymert, Ingvild S (2017). Doktorgradskandidater i Norge: Forskeropplæring, arbeidsvilkår og karriereforventninger.
• Reymert, Ingvild S (2017). Akademisk frihet i instituttsektoren.
• Reymert, Ingvild (2017). Kandidater og arbeidsgivere om arbeidslivsrelevans.
• Reymert, Ingvild (2016). Hva er studiekvalitet? Ledelse og Teknikk. p. 22–23.
• Reymert, Ingvild (2016). Hvordan ser arbeidslivet på kandidater fra UiO?
• Reymert, Ingvild (2016). Utdanner vi den kompetansen Norge trenger?
• Reymert, Ingvild (2016). Overgang til arbeidslivet.
• Reymert, Ingvild (2016). Kvalitet – hva er det? Og hva vet vi?
• Reymert, Ingvild (2016). Kvalitet – hva er det? Og hva vet vi?
• Reymert, Ingvild; Hjellbrekke, Johannes & Frølich, Nicoline (2016). Is the landscape changing? A study of the changes in the Norwegian higher education sector.
• Hovdhaugen, Elisabeth & Reymert, Ingvild (2016). More focused on studying? Differences in time spent studying between students who work and students who do not.
• Frølich, Nicoline; Trondal, Jarle; Caspersen, Joakim & Reymert, Ingvild (2015). Managing mergers - governing Institutional integration.
• Hovdhaugen, Elisabeth & Reymert, Ingvild (2015). More focused on studying? Differences in time spent studying between students that work and students that do not.
• Reymert , Ingvild Stakkevold (2011). Høyrepopulistiske partier uten dametekke. Samtiden. 3.

View all works in Cristin