Peer review research assessment: a sensitivity analysis of performance rankings to the share of research product evaluated

被引:9
作者
Abramo, Giovanni [1 ,2 ]
D'Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea [1 ]
Viel, Fulvio [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Roma Tor Vergata, Sch Engn, Dept Management, Lab Studies Res & Technol Transfer, I-00133 Rome, Italy
[2] Natl Res Council Italy, Inst Syst Anal & Comp Sci, I-00185 Rome, Italy
关键词
Research assessment exercise; Peer review; Rankings; Bibliometrics; Universities; Italy;
D O I
10.1007/s11192-010-0238-0
中图分类号
TP39 [计算机的应用];
学科分类号
081203 ; 0835 ;
摘要
In national research assessment exercises that take the peer review approach, research organizations are evaluated on the basis of a subset of their scientific production. The dimension of the subset varies from nation to nation but is typically set as a proportional function of the number of researchers employed at each research organization. However, scientific fertility varies from discipline to discipline, meaning that the representativeness of such a subset also varies according to discipline. The rankings resulting from the assessments could be quite sensitive to the size of the share of articles selected for evaluation. The current work examines this issue, developing empirical evidence of variations in ranking due changes in the dimension of the subset of products evaluated. The field of observation is represented by the scientific production from the hard sciences of the entire Italian university system, from 2001 to 2003.
引用
收藏
页码:705 / 720
页数:16
相关论文
共 16 条
  • [1] Assessment of sectoral aggregation distortion in research productivity measurements
    Abramo, Giovanni
    D'Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea
    Di Costa, Flavia
    [J]. RESEARCH EVALUATION, 2008, 17 (02) : 111 - 121
  • [2] A Decision Support System for Public Research Organizations Participating in National Research Assessment Exercises
    Abramo, Giovanni
    D'Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2009, 60 (10): : 2095 - 2106
  • [3] Allocative efficiency in public research funding: Can bibliometrics help?
    Abramo, Giovanni
    D'Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea
    Caprasecca, Alessandro
    [J]. RESEARCH POLICY, 2009, 38 (01) : 206 - 215
  • [4] DEST, 2007, RES QUAL FRAM ASS QU
  • [5] *ERA, 2009, EXC RES AUSTR EV GUI
  • [6] University research evaluation and funding: An international comparison
    Geuna, A
    Martin, BR
    [J]. MINERVA, 2003, 41 (04) : 277 - 304
  • [7] Evolving regimes of multi-university research evaluation
    Hicks, Diana
    [J]. HIGHER EDUCATION, 2009, 57 (04) : 393 - 404
  • [8] THE PHILOSOPHICAL BASIS OF PEER-REVIEW AND THE SUPPRESSION OF INNOVATION
    HORROBIN, DF
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1990, 263 (10): : 1438 - 1441
  • [9] Moxham H., 1992, Science and Technology policy, P7
  • [10] Citation counts and the Research Assessment Exercise V - Archaeology and the 2001 RAE
    Norris, M
    Oppenheim, C
    [J]. JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, 2003, 59 (06) : 709 - 730