An Empirical Study on the Research Application Evaluation

摘要

Through an quasi-experiment, it is confirmed that the third grade discipline catalogue should be the reference standard to distinguish peers from non-peers, furthermore, this paper comparatively analyzes the difference of research application evaluation made by peers and non-peers between nature science and humanities and social science. The test result about the hypothesis illumed by "chess game experiment" indicate that the idea about judging system quality dose not suitable for research application evaluation, which proves that the peers is the key role to grantee evaluation effectiveness.