A Systematic Review of Arts Practice-Based Research Abstracts from Small and/or Specialist Institutions

Through this qualitative systematic review, the authors ask the following: To what extent is the 300-word abstract fit for purpose in representing art and design practice-based research outputs on small and/or specialist institutional repositories? The abstract is an important part of the metadata when an Arts Practice-Based Output (APBO) is deposited on a repository. APBOs are non-traditional item types resulting from creative/artistic research processes. Examples include exhibitions, artefacts and digital videos. Little is known about how effectively these abstracts communicate research processes and insights across the art and design sector. This study aims to investigate how well the abstract communicates information about the arts practice-based research through a systematic review of APBOs. The eligibility criteria for inclusion in the review were as follows: APBOs must be from the date range January 2019 to January 2024, be an item type where the 300-word abstract is required, the abstract must be part of the publicly available metadata for the item, and outputs must be practice-based and from the art and design field. The date range (2019–2024) was employed because, during this time, APBOs had gained recognition in the wider research environment. APBOs from the reviewers’ institutional repository were not included in this study to avoid bias that could skew the results of the review. The data repositories from small and/or specialist Higher Education Institutions in the United Kingdom were searched for outputs which appeared to meet the eligibility criteria. These types of institution prioritise and produce more of these output types. A quality tool appropriate for creative/artistic research was applied to the identified dataset of APBOs. The resulting 27 APBOs’ 300-word abstracts were analysed using a thematic approach. Findings suggest that the 300-word abstracts contained information about the quality indicators such as whether the project got funding, the identities of prestigious collaborators and/or dissemination vehicles, and the international recognition of the research. Other identified themes were methodologies, contribution to knowledge, subject matter and item type.