Comments on “Ranking researchers: Evidence from Indonesia” by Fry et al. (2023)

Dasapta Erwin Irawan, Juneman Abraham, lham Akhsanu Ridlo, Harya Dwi Nugraha, Ismail Suardi Wekke, Anis Fuad, Alfend Rudyawan, Cahyo Seftyono

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


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.

Original languageEnglish
Article number104817
JournalResearch Policy
Issue number7
Publication statusPublished - Sept 2023


  • Higher education
  • Low-middle income countries
  • Ranking database
  • Research assessment
  • Research evaluation
  • SINTA platform
  • World class university


Dive into the research topics of 'Comments on “Ranking researchers: Evidence from Indonesia” by Fry et al. (2023)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this