Notions of research quality are contextual in many respects: they varybetween fields of research, between review contexts and between policy contexts.Yet, the role of these co-existing notions in research, and in research policy, ispoorly understood. In this paper we offer a novel framework to study and understandresearch quality across three key dimensions. First, we distinguish betweenquality notions that originate in research fields (Field-type) and in research policyspaces (Space-type). Second, drawing on existing studies, we identify three attributes(often) considered important for ‘good research’: its originality/novelty, plausibility/reliability, and value or usefulness. Third, we identify five different sites wherenotions of research quality emerge, are contested and institutionalised: researchersthemselves, knowledge communities, research organisations, funding agencies andnational policy arenas. We argue that the framework helps us understand processesand mechanisms through which ‘good research’ is recognised as well as tensionsarising from the co-existence of (potentially) conflicting quality notions.