How the Assessment of Scientific Performance Impacts the Research Freedom of Scientists

Introduction. Poorly constructed assessment systems can disrupt the logic of scientific development and contribute to a narrow scientific principles. This is particularly facilitated by the predetermination of priority research topics and methods, limitation of funding, and access to scientific communication tools. Understanding the mechanisms of how evaluations influence allows for the improvement of evaluation tools and minimises the likelihood of negative evaluation consequences. Methods. A review of the global document flow reflecting the impact of scientific performance assessments has clarified information about the mechanisms of how assessments impact research freedom. The majority of foreign publications included in the review are from 2008—2023. Results and Discussion. Qualitative research is the main source of information on the impact of evaluation. Strong quantitative evidence of the impact of peer and hybrid assessment on the choice of topics, research areas, and approaches pertains to social sciences and humanities. The mechanism of influence varies depending on the assessment method. The influence of peer review is evident in that researchers take into account expert opinions when planning a study. The impact of quantitative assessment is that researchers consider publication prospects. Therefore, due to risk avoidance, evaluation can stimulate self-limitation, which can ultimately lead to increased uniformity in research. Scientists are required to make additional efforts to find ways to maintain research freedom. Many instances of its manifestation are due to the factors in the environment that counteract evaluation and the adaptation of scientists to the evaluation system. Conclusion. Evaluation is one of the key factors in implementing science policies. It signals which studies are prioritised, which rules they must comply with, and which ones they should not. The impact of evaluation on research freedom is most pronounced for scientifically weak subjects, when evaluation periods are insufficient for obtaining a scientific result, and when formal criteria are used without considering disciplinary specifics. During the implementation of evaluation activities, measures must be taken to preserve research freedom.