Committee peer review at an international research foundation: predictive validity and fairness of selection decisions on post-graduate fellowship applications

Lutz Bornmann () and Hans-Dieter Daniel

Research Evaluation, 2005, vol. 14, issue 1, 15-20

Abstract: We investigated committee peer review for awarding long-term fellowships to post-graduate researchers as practised by the Boehringer Ingelheim Fonds (BIF) — a foundation for the promotion of basic research in biomedicine. The most important aspect of our study was to investigate the predictive validity of the procedure, i.e. whether the foundation achieves its aim to select as fellowship recipients the best junior scientists. Our bibliometric analysis shows that this is indeed the case and that the selection procedure is thus highly valid. With regard to fairness of the procedure, we analysed the extent to which the foundation's Board of Trustees' practice of reviewing the applications in alphabetic order when making final selection decisions has an influence on the decisions that they make. A statistically significant influence of the postulated bias variable could be observed, but the effect size was small. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Date: 2005
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (8)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154405781776283 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:rseval:v:14:y:2005:i:1:p:15-20

Access Statistics for this article

Research Evaluation is currently edited by Julia Melkers, Emanuela Reale and Thed van Leeuwen

More articles in Research Evaluation from Oxford University Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().