Academic Publishing and the REF: What UK Researchers Need to Know

The Research Excellence Framework shapes the publishing priorities of every university in England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. It determines how research funding is allocated to UK higher education institutions, and the quality and reach of research outputs are the most heavily weighted component of every REF submission. If you are a UK academic at any career stage, understanding how the REF affects publishing decisions is not optional. It affects which journals you target, how your outputs are selected for submission, and how your research profile is assessed at every performance review.

This article explains how the REF works, what it means for your publishing strategy, and what practical steps you can take to maximise the quality of the outputs you submit. It covers the output quality profile, the role of journal metrics in REF preparation, open access requirements, and the English language quality standard that international journals apply to submissions from UK and international researchers alike.

What the REF Is and How It Works

The Research Excellence Framework is the UK's system for assessing the quality of research produced by higher education institutions. It is conducted approximately every six to seven years, with the most recent completed assessment being REF 2021 and the next cycle being REF 2029. Research England, the Scottish Funding Council, the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and the Department for the Economy Northern Ireland jointly conduct the exercise and use its outcomes to allocate a significant proportion of the quality-related research funding (QR funding) distributed to UK universities.

Each university submits research across defined Units of Assessment (UoAs) covering the full range of academic disciplines. Within each UoA submission, universities present research outputs, evidence of impact, and a description of their research environment. Each of these three elements is assessed and given a quality profile.

The quality profile assigns outputs to one of four star ratings. Four-star work is defined as world-leading in terms of originality, significance, and rigour. Three-star work is internationally excellent. Two-star work is recognised internationally. One-star work is recognised nationally. Unclassified work falls below the recognised threshold. The proportion of outputs rated at four-star and three-star is the primary driver of QR funding allocation, and the difference between a strong three-star and a four-star rating has significant financial consequences for the institution.

Outputs: The Core of REF Submission

Research outputs are the central element of REF assessment and account for the largest proportion of the overall quality profile. In REF 2021, outputs were weighted at 60 percent of the overall profile. The outputs component of REF 2029 is expected to carry similar or greater weight.

The most common output type submitted in most UoAs is the journal article, though monographs, book chapters, conference proceedings, and other output types are accepted in disciplines where they are the primary mode of scholarly communication. In STEM disciplines and most social sciences, peer-reviewed journal articles in internationally indexed journals are the predominant output type. In the humanities, monographs carry significant weight. In disciplines such as law and business, both journal articles and other output types are commonly submitted.

How outputs are selected for submission

Each eligible staff member included in a REF submission can have a defined number of outputs attributed to them. REF 2021 allowed a maximum of five outputs and a minimum of one per person, with the overall submission required to have an average of at least 2.5 outputs per submitted staff member. REF 2029 is expected to modify these rules. Follow your institution's research office guidance on the specific requirements as they are confirmed.

The selection of which outputs to submit is a strategic institutional decision. Research offices and heads of department work with academics to identify the strongest outputs available in the submission window. Outputs that are assessed as likely to achieve four-star or three-star ratings are prioritised. Outputs assessed as likely to achieve two-star or below may be excluded in favour of stronger alternatives. This selection process means that the quality of every output you publish during the REF period matters, because any of them may be selected for submission depending on what else is available from colleagues in your UoA.

What peer reviewers assess

REF output quality is assessed by expert sub-panels convened for each Unit of Assessment. Sub-panel members are senior academics in the relevant field drawn from UK and international institutions. They assess each output against the four-star criteria: originality, significance, and rigour. These are assessed holistically. There is no formula. Outputs that demonstrate a clear and important contribution to the field, that are methodologically sound, and that are presented in a way that makes the contribution easy to evaluate score more highly than outputs where the contribution is buried, the methodology is unclear, or the presentation creates interpretive difficulty.

Journal prestige is not an explicit REF criterion, but sub-panel members are aware of journal standing within their field. An article in a journal with high standing in the field starts the assessment with stronger contextual credibility than an equivalent article in a lower-standing journal, because publication in a high-standing journal signals that the article has already passed rigorous peer review by experts in the same field. This does not mean that articles in lower-ranked journals cannot achieve four-star ratings. They can and do. But journal standing is part of the context within which outputs are assessed.

Journal Metrics and REF Strategy

UK universities use various journal metrics to inform their REF preparation, though none are officially prescribed by the REF itself. Understanding how your institution uses these metrics helps you make better-informed decisions about where to target your publications.

Impact factor and journal rankings

The Journal Impact Factor (JIF), published by Clarivate Analytics as part of the Journal Citation Reports, remains the most widely used metric in STEM and social science disciplines for assessing journal standing. It measures the average number of citations received per article published in a journal over a two-year window. Higher impact factor journals in a field are generally considered more prestigious, though this varies significantly across disciplines: an impact factor of 3.0 may be high in one field and modest in another.

UK universities in STEM and social science disciplines often use impact factor as a proxy for journal quality in REF preparation discussions, though most research offices are careful to note that REF sub-panels assess output quality directly rather than inferring it from journal metrics. The practical implication is that publishing in journals with strong impact factors in your field improves the likelihood that your output will be selected for REF submission and that it will be contextually credible when assessed.

ABS rankings for business and management

In business and management disciplines, the Academic Journal Guide published by the Chartered Association of Business Schools (commonly called the ABS list) is the most widely used journal ranking framework for REF preparation. The ABS list classifies journals on a scale of 1 to 4*, where 4* journals are considered the most prestigious outlets in the field. Most UK business schools use ABS rankings explicitly in their REF strategy, and publication in ABS 4 or 4* journals is typically a requirement for staff to be considered research-active for REF purposes at many institutions.

REL rankings for law

Law uses the Research Excellence List (REL), a curated list of journals used as a benchmark for assessing output quality in law UoA submissions. The REL does not assign star ratings but identifies a set of journals considered to represent international excellence in legal scholarship. Publication in REL journals is widely understood within law schools as the target for REF-eligible output.

ERA rankings for selected disciplines

The Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) journal rankings, maintained by the Australian Research Council, are used informally in some UK disciplines alongside UK-specific rankings. The ERA list is particularly referenced in computing, information systems, and some social science disciplines where UK-specific rankings are less developed. Some UK institutions use ERA rankings as a supplementary reference point when assessing output quality in these disciplines.

Citations and bibliometric evidence

For STEM disciplines and economics, REF sub-panels can access citation data and bibliometric information as part of their assessment of individual outputs. High citation counts relative to the field are taken as evidence that the research has had significant impact within the academic community, which is relevant to the significance criterion in the four-star definition. This does not mean that citation counts determine star ratings. Sub-panels are instructed to assess the work directly. But citation evidence provides context that sub-panel members take into account.

Open Access and REF 2029

Open access compliance is a requirement for REF output eligibility, not a strategic choice. Under the open access policy for REF 2029, journal articles and conference proceedings with an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) must be deposited in an institutional or subject repository at the point of acceptance and made openly available within specified timeframes. Outputs that do not comply with the open access requirements are not eligible for submission in the outputs component of the REF.

The REF open access policy requires that the accepted manuscript, which is the author's final peer-reviewed text before publisher formatting, is deposited in an open access repository at the point of acceptance for publication, or as soon as possible thereafter. The embargo periods within which the manuscript must be made publicly available vary by discipline: shorter embargoes apply to STEM and social science outputs, longer embargoes apply to humanities outputs. Your institution's research office maintains guidance on current embargo periods and repository requirements for your specific discipline.

Open access compliance is an administrative requirement, and meeting it is straightforward once you understand what your institution requires. The most common reason UK academics miss open access requirements is failing to deposit the accepted manuscript at the point of acceptance rather than at the point of publication. The deposit requirement is triggered by acceptance, not by publication. If you wait until the article is published to deposit the accepted manuscript, you may have already missed the compliance window for some journals with immediate publication processes.

Targeting the Right Journals for REF

Journal selection is the most consequential publishing decision you make in terms of REF preparation. An article published in the right journal for your field creates a REF-eligible output that is contextually credible to sub-panel members and likely to be selected for submission. An article published in the wrong journal, whether too low-ranking for your institution's REF threshold or outside the scope of your UoA, may not contribute to your REF return regardless of its research quality.

Match the journal to the sub-panel

Each REF Unit of Assessment has a specific scope, and sub-panel members are experts in that scope. An article submitted in a journal that sits clearly within the scope of the sub-panel assessing it starts from a stronger position than an article in a journal at the edge of the sub-panel's expertise. Interdisciplinary work creates particular challenges: an article that crosses two UoA boundaries may not fit perfectly in either sub-panel's expertise. Where possible, target journals that are clearly within the scope of the UoA your institution is likely to submit the output under.

Check your institution's REF threshold

Most UK universities have internal guidance on the minimum journal quality threshold for REF-eligible outputs. In practice, this means outputs published in journals below a certain standing in the field are unlikely to be selected for REF submission regardless of the article's individual quality, because the institution has stronger alternatives available. Find out what your research office considers to be the minimum threshold for REF-eligible publications in your field before you submit to a journal. This is not gatekeeping. It is strategic information that helps you target your effort appropriately.

Lead time and submission windows

REF submission windows are defined by publication date. Outputs must be published within the REF period to be eligible for submission. The REF 2029 period covers outputs published from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2028. This is a long window, but lead times at high-ranking journals in competitive fields can run to eighteen months to three years from submission to publication. An article submitted in late 2026 to a journal with an eighteen-month review and production process may not be published until 2028 or beyond. If you are planning outputs specifically for REF 2029, work backwards from the publication deadline to understand when you need to complete and submit your manuscripts to have confidence they will be published within the window.

The English Language Standard at REF-Relevant Journals

The journals that generate the strongest REF outcomes are internationally indexed, peer-reviewed publications with rigorous editorial and peer review processes. These journals receive manuscripts from researchers across the world and apply the same English language quality standard to every submission regardless of the author's national origin or institutional affiliation. A manuscript from a UK researcher at a Russell Group university is assessed against the same language quality standard as a manuscript from MIT, ETH Zurich, or the University of Tokyo.

This matters practically because the journals most relevant for strong REF performance are precisely the journals most likely to apply language quality expectations at the desk review stage. A manuscript submitted to a Nature journal, a leading economics journal, or a top clinical medicine journal that contains persistent language problems may be returned before peer review on language grounds, before any sub-panel-relevant assessment of the research quality has taken place. The research may be world-leading, but if the English creates too much interpretive difficulty, it does not generate the REF output the research deserved.

Language quality and peer reviewer impression

Research on peer review consistently shows that manuscripts that are easier to read receive more favourable assessments than manuscripts with equivalent research that require more effort to follow. Peer reviewers are evaluating the research, but they are doing so by reading the manuscript in English. A manuscript that communicates its contribution clearly in the introduction, describes its methodology without ambiguity, reports its findings with precision, and interprets them with appropriate directness in the discussion gives reviewers more confidence in the research than a manuscript where the quality of the underlying work has to be extracted from prose that impedes rather than aids understanding.

For UK academics at institutions under significant REF pressure, this means that the English quality of a manuscript submitted to a high-ranking journal is not a secondary concern. It is directly connected to whether the manuscript achieves the REF outcome the research merits. A four-star piece of research that achieves a three-star REF rating partly because the manuscript was not as clearly written as it could have been is a preventable outcome.

International researchers at UK institutions

A significant proportion of the research staff at UK universities are international academics whose first language is not English. These researchers produce REF-eligible outputs in English for the same high-ranking journals as their UK-born colleagues, under the same peer review standards. For international researchers at UK institutions, the practical challenge is producing manuscripts in English that meet the language quality standard of journals where peer reviewers are typically native English speakers from leading international institutions. Professional editing by a native English editor with disciplinary expertise in the relevant field is the most direct way to close this gap before submission.

Preparing Your Manuscripts for High-Ranking Journals

The following steps improve the likelihood that a manuscript submitted to a high-ranking, REF-relevant journal reaches peer review and receives the assessment its research quality warrants.

Read the target journal before writing

Read five to ten recent articles in your target journal before completing the manuscript. Assess the journal's preferred article structure, the typical length and depth of the literature review, how methods are described, how findings are presented, and how the discussion is framed. Every high-ranking journal has specific conventions, and a manuscript written to match those conventions is more likely to pass initial editorial assessment than one that treats journal submission as a generic process. If you are targeting a journal you have not published in before, this reading is not optional. It is the minimum preparation for a competitive submission.

Write the abstract last and revise it most

The abstract is the first thing a handling editor reads and the basis on which the desk review decision is made. It must state the research problem, the methodology, the key findings, and the contribution to the field within the journal's word limit, in plain and precise English. Most academics write the abstract first as an outline and revise it least. The abstract should be written last and revised more carefully than any other section of the manuscript, because it determines whether the manuscript proceeds to peer review or is returned at the desk review stage. A poorly written abstract returns a manuscript that deserved peer review.

Check open access compliance before submission

Confirm that the journal you are targeting complies with the REF open access requirements before submitting. Check whether the journal is listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), whether it is indexed in your institution's approved list of open access options, and what the embargo period is for your discipline. If you are publishing in a subscription journal with an embargo period, confirm what your institution's repository deposit process requires and set a reminder to complete the deposit at the point of acceptance rather than at the point of publication.

Have the manuscript professionally edited before submission

For manuscripts targeting high-ranking journals where the REF stakes are highest, professional editing by a native English editor with expertise in your discipline is the most effective intervention available before submission. A professional editor reads your manuscript the way a peer reviewer reads it for the first time, without the background context you have developed over months of working on the research, and identifies the language problems that are invisible to the writer who produced the text. Article errors, tense inconsistencies, sentence-level clarity problems, unclear transitions between sections, and passive constructions used in sections where the journal expects active voice are all addressed in a single editing pass. All corrections are returned in Track Changes so you can review each change individually before the manuscript is submitted.

The practical argument for professional editing before a high-ranking submission is straightforward. A manuscript that reaches peer review at a four-star journal and receives a favourable assessment generates a REF-eligible output with the contextual credibility of a top-ranked journal publication. A manuscript that is returned at desk review for language quality and resubmitted three months later to a lower-ranked journal generates a lower-value REF output. The cost of professional editing before the first submission is small relative to the value of the REF outcome it helps protect.

Editor World's Academic Editing Service for UK Researchers

Editor World's journal article editing service connects UK academics and international researchers at UK institutions with native English editors whose academic background matches their discipline. You choose your editor by field before submitting. Browse editor profiles at editorworld.com/editors by academic discipline, credentials, and verified client ratings from previous researchers in your field before selecting. Message any editor directly before submitting to discuss your manuscript, your target journal, and any specific language concerns you want the editor to focus on. Request a free sample edit of your abstract and introduction before committing to the full manuscript.

All editing is returned in Track Changes in Microsoft Word. British English is applied by default for UK researchers. Specify American English if your target journal applies American English house style. A certificate of editing is available as an optional add-on for manuscripts submitted to journals that require confirmation of native English editing. Turnaround options range from 2 hours for short urgent submissions to 7 days for longer manuscripts, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

For a full overview of Editor World's services for UK researchers, visit our English editing services in the UK page. For the dedicated journal article editing service for UK researchers, visit our journal article editing UK service page. For guidance on open access requirements, journal selection, and REF preparation at your specific institution, consult your research office. They maintain the most current guidance on your institution's REF strategy and the thresholds that apply in your specific Unit of Assessment.

Content reviewed by Editor World editorial staff. Information about the Research Excellence Framework is based on publicly available REF documentation and is provided for informational purposes. UK academics should consult their institution's research office for guidance on their specific REF obligations and institutional strategy.