Whilst the publications such as San Francisco Declaration for Research Assessment (DORA), The Metric Tide, and the Leiden Manifesto for Research Metrics and caution the use of metrics in research assessment, research on the actual influences of evaluative bibliometrics has been sporadic. This study aims to understand the implications and consequences of the use of evaluative metrics, including the perceived importance of evaluative metrics such as impact factor and h-index, and the influences on research practices, citation behaviour, and scholarly communication. Semi- structured, in-depth interviews were conducted with researchers from the humanities, the social sciences, and the sciences in different career stages in Ireland between June 2016 and May 2017. In this presentation, some findings of the study will be discussed, focusing on the different views on research practices and assessment in STEM and SSH disciplines. Although the differences in research practices and citation patterns between STEM and SSH are commonly known, this study shows that there is also a divide between theoretical research and applied research in all disciplines. The study also shows that there is a general dissatisfaction of current evaluative bibliometrics and that the development of more nuanced, discipline-specific metrics for research assessment should be supported.