See also these previous discussions:

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Why_do_bibliometric_studies_get_so_much_attention_in_todays_world_of_academia

https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_are_impacts_researchers_can_create_beyond_citations_and_how_to_create_them

Beyond the "characters", the evaluation always depends on the evaluator.

So, it's subjective.

What is my reaction if someone tells me a story? I react to and evaluate it depending on how interesting and truthful it is, how juicy and correct the narrator's language is. I lough, if it's funny, and I doubt, if it sounds fantastic and extraordinary. If someone evaluates such a storyteller based on color of that one's socks, or whether or not s/he wears an exclusive frame of glasses, it's a profound misconception.

Hello Dr Tadiwa Elisha Nyamasvisva

The three Rs you mentioned - Relevance, Respected, and Referred to - are commonly used criteria to evaluate the impact of academic researchers and their publications. While they can be useful indicators of success in academia, they are not without limitations and are not always appropriate for every field or situation.

Relevance is important because research that is relevant to real-world problems is more likely to be cited, applied, and have a positive impact. However, relevance can be subjective and may vary across different disciplines and research contexts.

Respected refers to the reputation of the researcher and the journal or conference in which the publication appears. A respected journal or conference can enhance the credibility of a researcher and their work. However, relying solely on the reputation of a journal or conference can lead to bias and overlook innovative and impactful research published in lesser-known venues.

Referred to indicates the number of times a publication has been cited by other researchers. Citation counts are commonly used to measure the impact of a publication and the productivity and influence of a researcher. However, citation counts can be influenced by many factors, such as the research area, publication type, language, and citation practices in different countries.

In conclusion, while the three Rs can provide valuable information about the impact of academic researchers and their publications, they should be used with caution and in conjunction with other criteria to provide a comprehensive evaluation. Additionally, these criteria should not be the sole determinants of funding, promotion, or tenure decisions. Other factors, such as teaching, service, collaboration, and mentorship, should also be considered when evaluating the overall contributions of an academic researcher.