首页> 外文期刊>Scientometrics >Scientometric indicators: peer-review, bibliometric methods and conflict of interests
【24h】

Scientometric indicators: peer-review, bibliometric methods and conflict of interests

机译:科学计量指标:同行评审,文献计量方法和利益冲突

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The paper discusses the role of scientometric indicators in peer-review selection of research project proposals. An ex post facto evaluation was made of three calls for research project proposals in Slovenia: 2003 with a peer review system designed in a way that conflict of interest was not avoided effectively, 2005 with a sound international peer-review system with minimized conflict of interest influence but a limited number of reviewers, and 2008 with a combination of scientometric indicators and a sound international peer review with minimized conflict of interest influence. The hypothesis was that the three different peer review systems would have different correlations with the same set of scientometric indicators. In the last two decision-making systems (2005 and 2008) where conflict of interest was effectively avoided, we have a high percentage (65%) of projects that would have been selected in the call irrespective of the method (peer review or bibliometrics solely). In contrast, in the 2003 call there is a significantly smaller percentage (49%) of projects that would have been selected in the call irrespective of the method (peer review or bibliometrics solely). It was shown that while scientometric indicators can hardly replace the peer-review system as the ultimate decision-making and support system, they can reveal its weaknesses on one hand and on the other can verify peer-review scores and minimize conflict of interest if necessary.
机译:本文讨论了科学计量指标在研究项目提案的同行评审选择中的作用。对斯洛文尼亚的三个研究项目提案进行事后评估:2003年,同行评审制度的设计未能有效避免利益冲突; 2005年,健全的国际同行评审制度将利益冲突降到最低影响力,但评论员数量有限,2008年结合了科学计量指标和良好的国际同行评议,且利益冲突的影响降至最低。假设是,三个不同的同行评议系统与同一套科学计量指标具有不同的相关性。在有效避免利益冲突的最后两个决策系统(2005和2008)中,无论采用哪种方法(同行评审或文献计量法),我们都会在电话中选择的项目比例很高(65%) )。相比之下,在2003年的电话会议中,无论采用哪种方法(仅通过同行评审或文献计量法),都将在电话会议中选择的项目比例要小得多(49%)。结果表明,虽然科学计量指标几乎不能取代同行评议系统作为最终的决策和支持系统,但它们一方面可以揭示其劣势,另一方面可以验证同行评议分数,并在必要时最大程度地减少利益冲突。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号