Past performance, peer review and project selection: a case study in the social and behavioral sciences

被引:68
作者
van den Besselaar, Peter [1 ,2 ]
Leydesdorff, Loet [3 ]
机构
[1] Rathenau Inst, Sci Syst Assessment Dept, NL-2593 HW The Hague, Netherlands
[2] Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Dept Org Sci, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[3] Univ Amsterdam, ASCoR, NL-1012 CX Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
DECISION-MAKING; INDICATORS; UNIVERSITY; NEPOTISM; BIAS;
D O I
10.3152/095820209X475360
中图分类号
G25 [图书馆学、图书馆事业]; G35 [情报学、情报工作];
学科分类号
1205 ; 120501 ;
摘要
Does past performance influence success in grant applications? We tested whether the decisions of the Netherlands Research Council for the Economic and Social Sciences correlate with the past performances of applicants in publications and citations, and with the results of the Council's peer reviews. The Council proves successful in distinguishing grant applicants with above-average from below-average performance, but within the former group there was no correlation between past performance and receiving a grant. When comparing the best-performing researchers who were denied funding with those who received it, the rejected researchers significantly outperformed the funded ones. The best rejected proposals score on average as high on the outcomes of the peer-review process as the accepted proposals. The Council successfully corrected for gender effects during the selection process. We explain why these findings may apply beyond this case. However, if research councils are not able to select the 'best' researchers, perhaps they should reconsider their mission. We discuss the role of research councils in the science system in terms of variation, innovation and quality control.
引用
收藏
页码:273 / 288
页数:16
相关论文
共 41 条
[1]  
Adler R., 2008, CITATION STAT
[2]   Peer reviews and bibliometric indicators: a comparative study at a Norwegian university [J].
Aksnes, DW ;
Taxt, RE .
RESEARCH EVALUATION, 2004, 13 (01) :33-41
[3]  
ANDERSEN H, 2009, METASCIENCE, V18, P1
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2007, Science and Public Policy, DOI DOI 10.3152/030234207X254404
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2007, SCI PUBL POLICY, DOI DOI 10.3152/030234207X256529
[6]   The UK Research Assessment Exercise: the evolution of a national research evaluation system [J].
Barker, Katharine .
RESEARCH EVALUATION, 2007, 16 (01) :3-12
[7]  
Bohmer S., 2008, 3 IFQ
[8]  
BORNMAN L, 2008, FESTSCHRIFT ULRICH T, P365
[9]   Gender differences in grant peer review: A meta-analysis [J].
Bornmann, Lutz ;
Mutz, Ruediger ;
Daniel, Hans-Dieter .
JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS, 2007, 1 (03) :226-238
[10]   Potential sources of bias in research fellowship assessments: effects of university prestige and field of study [J].
Bornmann, Lutz ;
Daniel, Hans-Dieter .
RESEARCH EVALUATION, 2006, 15 (03) :209-219