The relationship between indicators of and expert judgement of, research performance were compared in the context of mission oriented pharmaceutical research. Expert judgment is very highly correlated with measures of publication activity, much more so than with very plausible measures of research output and research quality. Furthermore, expert judgement appears to be an additive function of publication size (another name for which might be visibility) and publication quality, with the principal component being size/visibility. These results are very similar to those found byAnderson, Narin, andMcAllister in the context of academic research, but these findings emerge from a context which allows other variables to compete in predicting expert judgement, and are therefore to that degree more robuts. In addition this study finds a clear pattern of subject specificity, which implies that visibility is a function of the judge's subject field.