Dasapta Erwin Irawan, Juneman Abraham, lham Akhsanu Ridlo, Harya Dwi Nugraha, Ismail Suardi Wekke, Anis Fuad, Alfend Rudyawan, Cahyo Seftyono
The Fry et al. article suggests that productivity can be improved by ranking researchers on a platform, but this assumption overlooks the possibility that previous resource allocation may not have been inefficient. The proposed solution simply shifts resources towards measurable metrics, such as SINTA, without a clear understanding of its long-term effects. Therefore, it is important to consider potential trade-offs and be mindful of whether such policies are beneficial in the future. The authors suggest that Fry et al. should broaden their sources and engage with stakeholders to gain a nuanced understanding of the local context and challenges confronting researchers in Indonesia. They also emphasize the importance of prioritizing research integrity over traditional metrics and rankings, aligning research funding allocation with national development priorities, and considering potential trade-offs when implementing policies such as the SINTA platform. This is the true cost of implementing rank-based and ingratiation-driven research curation system. © 2023 Elsevier B.V.
Faculty of Earth Sciences and Technology, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Bandung, Indonesia; Psychology Department, Faculty of Humanities, Bina Nusantara University, Jakarta, Indonesia; Faculty of Public Health, Universitas Airlangga, Indonesia; Faculty of Exploration and Production Technology, Universitas Pertamina, Jakarta, Indonesia; State Islamic Institute, West Papua, Sorong, Indonesia; Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Population Health, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia; Department of Politics and Citizenship, Faculty of Social Sciences, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Semarang, Indonesia
