I appreciate your response and insightful example. First, let me just say that I acknowledge this list is by no means exhaustive and there are certainly other criteria that make research ‘good.’
In regard to your other points I agree that the first three points are, in many ways, about popularity, though not necessarily for popularity’s sake. One of the great tragedies that I’ve seen as an academic researcher is that some very ‘sound’ research is being done that could benefit a lot of people but the academic community doesn’t effectively transfer this research into the hands of people who can use it. In some ways I do think we have to be ‘rockstars’ if we want to get our research to get noticed and used (I am operating under an assumption or paradigm that values practical research). That said, I also recognize that research for the sake of research or that simply adds to the body of knowledge also has its place (an alternative paradigm).
To your other point, I think we are saying the same thing in different ways. What you call ‘sound’ research is really what I mean by ‘empirically derived.’ However, I agree that the word empirical has come to mean different things and doesn’t always coincide with ‘sound’ research. This point has become especially clear to me as I’ve delved into feminist research methods that call to question many of the tenets of traditional empirical research.
In either case, thanks for reading and adding a critical eye!