The future of research evaluation rests with an intelligent combination of advanced metrics and transparent peer review

Henk F Moed

Science and Public Policy, 2007, vol. 34, issue 8, 575-583

Abstract: The paper discusses the strengths and limitations of ‘metrics’ and peer review in large-scale evaluations of scholarly research performance. A real challenge is to combine the two methodologies in such a way that the strength of the first compensates for the limitations of the second, and vice versa. It underlines the need to systematically take into account the unintended effects of the use of metrics. It proposes a set of general criteria for the proper use of bibliometric indicators within peer-review processes, and applies these to a particular case: the UK Research Assessment Exercise (RAE). Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Date: 2007
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (23)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/030234207X255179 (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:scippl:v:34:y:2007:i:8:p:575-583

Access Statistics for this article

Science and Public Policy is currently edited by Nicoletta Corrocher, Jeong-Dong Lee, Mireille Matt and Nicholas Vonortas

More articles in Science and Public Policy from Oxford University Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().