a close but far from perfect relationship between the UGC’s assessment and rankings based on publication records”[@Crewe1988 p. 246]. Indeed, later exercises also showed that higher ranked institutions are typically larger (in terms of either staff or publications). In the same year, @Carpenter1988 analysed Physics and Chemistry outcomes of the UGC exercise. They compared the outcomes to a total influence score, a type of metric similar to the Eigenfactor [@Bergstrom2007], and found a correlation of $0.63$ for Physics and $0.77$ for Chemistry. The total influence score used by @Carpenter1988 is size-dependent, and the average influence per paper showed a correlation of only $0.22$ and $0.34$ for Physics and Chemistry, respectively. It is not clear whether the 1986 UGC results themselves were size-dependent or size-independent.

The next research selectivity exercise in 1989 was undertaken by the Universities Funding Council (UFC). The exercise made some changes and allowed universities to submit up to two publications per research staff [@Jump2014]. As an exception to the rule, the 1989 exercise was never used in any bibliometric study that compared the peer review results to metrics (although there were other analyses; see, for example, @Johnes1993).

The 1992 exercise—then called the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE)—sparked more 