EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Bibliometric Evaluation vs. Informed Peer Review: Evidence from Italy

Graziella Bertocchi (), Alfonso Gambardella (), Tullio Jappelli (), Carmela A. Nappi () and Franco Peracchi ()

Center for Economic Research (RECent) from University of Modena and Reggio E., Dept. of Economics "Marco Biagi"

Abstract: A relevant question for the organization of large scale research assessments is whether bibliometric evaluation and informed peer review where reviewers know where the work was published, yield similar results. It would suggest, for instance, that less costly bibliometric evaluation might - at least partly - replace informed peer review, or that bibliometric evaluation could reliably monitor research in between assessment exercises. We draw on our experience of evaluating Italian research in Economics, Business and Statistics, where almost 12,000 publications dated 2004-2010 were assessed. A random sample from the available population of journal articles shows that informed peer review and bibliometric analysis produce similar evaluations of the same set of papers. Whether because of independent convergence in assessment, or the influence of bibliometric information on the community of reviewers, the implication for the organization of these exercises is that these two approaches are substitutes.

New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-ger and nep-sog
Date: 2013-09
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3) Track citations by RSS feed

Downloads: (external link)
http://155.185.68.2/campusone/web_dep/Recentpaper/recent-wp93.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
Journal Article: Bibliometric evaluation vs. informed peer review: Evidence from Italy (2015) Downloads
Working Paper: Bibliometric Evaluation vs. Informed Peer Review: Evidence from Italy (2013) Downloads
Working Paper: Bibliometric Evaluation vs. Informed Peer Review: Evidence from Italy (2013) Downloads
Working Paper: Bibliometric Evaluation vs. Informed Peer Review: Evidence from Italy (2013) Downloads
Working Paper: Bibliometric Evaluation vs. Informed Peer Review: Evidence from Italy (2013) Downloads
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:mod:recent:093

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Center for Economic Research (RECent) from University of Modena and Reggio E., Dept. of Economics "Marco Biagi" Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by ().

 
Page updated 2019-07-13
Handle: RePEc:mod:recent:093