Evaluating research: from informed peer review to bibliometrics
arXiv:1811.01765 · doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0352-7
Abstract
National research assessment exercises are becoming regular events in ever more countries. The present work contrasts the peer-review and bibliometrics approaches in the conduct of these exercises. The comparison is conducted in terms of the essential parameters of any measurement system: accuracy, robustness, validity, functionality, time and costs. Empirical evidence shows that for the natural and formal sciences, the bibliometric methodology is by far preferable to peer-review. Setting up national databases of publications by individual authors, derived from Web of Science or Scopus databases, would allow much better, cheaper and more frequent national research assessments.
References in corpus (6)
- Diffusion of scientific credits and the ranking of scientists
- A heuristic approach to author name disambiguation in bibliometrics databases for large-scale research assessments
- Allocative efficiency in public research funding:can bibliometrics help?
- The measurement of italian universities' research productivity by a non parametric-bibliometric methodology
- National-scale research performance assessment at the individual level
- Peer review research assessment: a sensitivity analysis of performance rankings to the share of research product evaluated
Cited by in corpus (15)
- Assessing the varying level of impact measurement accuracy as a function of the citation window length
- National research assessment exercises: a comparison of peer review and bibliometrics rankings
- Revisiting the scaling of citations for research assessment
- A field-standardized application of DEA to national-scale research assessment of universities
- The VQR, Italy's second national research assessment: Methodological failures and ranking distortions
- National peer-review research assessment exercises for the hard sciences can be a complete waste of money: the Italian case
- A sensitivity analysis of researchers' productivity rankings to the time of citation observation
- Inefficiency in selecting products for submission to national research assessment exercises
- On tit for tat: Franceschini and Maisano versus ANVUR regarding the Italian research assessment exercise VQR 2011-2014
- Identification of young talented individuals in the natural and life sciences using bibliometric data
- A sensitivity analysis of research institutions' productivity rankings to the time of citation observation
- Like-for-like bibliometric substitutes for peer review: advantages and limits of indicators calculated from the ep index
- Throwing Out the Baby with the Bathwater: The Undesirable Effects of National Research Assessment Exercises on Research
- Measuring the match between evaluators and evaluees: Cognitive distances between panel members and research groups at the journal level
- A weighted unified informetrics based on Scopus and WoS