Noted, but not decisive. A cross-disciplinary analysis of metrics usage in Polish evaluative cultures.

This article investigates the diffusion and disciplinary variation of metrics-based reasoning in academic evaluation by analyzing 174 negative habilitation reviews from four Polish disciplines: art history, mathematics, materials engineering, and sociology. It finds that while materials engineering heavily incorporates quantitative indicators such as the h-index and impact factor, art history minimally uses metrics, and sociology and mathematics show intermediate and diverse patterns. Importantly, metrics are rarely the sole basis for negative evaluations; reviewers consistently combine quantitative data with merit-based and social considerations, reflecting entrenched disciplinary evaluation cultures. The study highlights challenges in standardizing metric use across fields and suggests that policy efforts to increase reliance on metrics may face resistance due to the prevailing importance of traditional academic judgments.