Abstract

Artistic research has emerged as a dynamic and contested field situated at the intersection of creative practice and 
scholarly inquiry. This study examines its epistemic legitimacy and the criteria by which it can be evaluated as a 
form of knowledge production. It argues that artistic research generates diverse forms of knowledge tacit, 
experiential, procedural, and propositional through iterative processes of creation, reflection, and documentation. 
Despite its growing institutional recognition, artistic research continues to face challenges related to definitional 
ambiguity, methodological inconsistency, and the evaluation of evidence. The paper explores conceptual 
frameworks that distinguish artistic research from traditional artistic practice and conventional academic research, 
emphasizing the importance of reflexivity, methodological transparency, and contextual grounding. It further 
analyses internal and external evaluation frameworks, including peer review, institutional alignment, and quality 
assurance mechanisms, highlighting the need for criteria that accommodate disciplinary diversity and 
transdisciplinary approaches. By addressing issues of power, access, and global epistemic diversity, the study 
advocates for more inclusive and pluralistic standards that recognize non-Western and practice-based knowledge 
systems. Ultimately, the paper contends that artistic research attains scholarly status when it articulates clear 
research questions, demonstrates rigorous inquiry processes, and communicates its knowledge claims effectively 
within and beyond artistic communities.