Judgement Noise in a Complex Evaluation System: Why the UK Research Excellence Framework Needs a Noise Audit

Expert judgement is inherently noisy, but the consequences of this variability are often underestimated. Here I examine the UK Research Excellence Framework (REF) as a case study illustrating how judgment noise can interact with structural features of a multi-stage evaluation system. Simulations show that noise in both internal departmental reviews and REF panel reviews, in conjunction with the bounded REF rating scale, produces systematic underestimation of the highest-performing departments. Panel noise, rather than internal noise, had a disproportionate impact on department rankings, with even moderate noise producing severe distortions. At a policy level, these results underscore the need for a noise audit of REF panel ratings. More broadly, the case of REF demonstrates that noise embedded in sequential evaluation, for example, in hiring and grant review decisions, does not “cancel out”, but instead can propagate in potentially surprising ways.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-09-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/d7n5m_v1
Primary Topic
Evaluation and Performance Assessment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Judgement Noise in a Complex Evaluation System: Why the UK Research Excellence Framework Needs a Noise Audit

Robert Ward
Evaluation and Performance Assessment
article

Judgement Noise in a Complex Evaluation System: Why the UK Research Excellence Framework Needs a Noise Audit

Robert Ward
article en

Abstract

Expert judgement is inherently noisy, but the consequences of this variability are often underestimated. Here I examine the UK Research Excellence Framework (REF) as a case study illustrating how judgment noise can interact with structural features of a multi-stage evaluation system. Simulations show that noise in both internal departmental reviews and REF panel reviews, in conjunction with the bounded REF rating scale, produces systematic underestimation of the highest-performing departments. Panel noise, rather than internal noise, had a disproportionate impact on department rankings, with even moderate noise producing severe distortions. At a policy level, these results underscore the need for a noise audit of REF panel ratings. More broadly, the case of REF demonstrates that noise embedded in sequential evaluation, for example, in hiring and grant review decisions, does not “cancel out”, but instead can propagate in potentially surprising ways.

Bangor University (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 69%
Evaluation and Performance Assessment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Judgement Noise in a Complex Evaluation System: Why the UK Research Excellence Framework Needs a Noise Audit — Robert Ward · (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS