Skip to content
Journal article

Informed peer review and uninformed bibliometrics?

Neufeld J, von Ins M ...see all

Research Evaluation, vol. 20, issue 1 (2011) pp. 31-46

  • 31

    Readers

    Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
  • 15

    Citations

    Citations of this article.
  • N/A

    Views

    ScienceDirect users who have downloaded this article.
Sign in to save reference

Abstract

Recent literature on issues relevant to bibliometric indicator relations and peer review discusses whether bibliometric indicators can predict the success of research grant applications. For example, Van den Besselaar and Leydesdorff (2009) reported a higher average number of publications/citations for the group of approved applicants than for the rejected applicants (section Social and Behavioral Sciences of the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research [NOW], MaGW). However, this difference disappears or even reverses when the group of 275 successful applicants was compared only to the best 275 rejected applicants. Given these findings, we have continued our analyses of publication data of applicants for the Emmy Noether-Programme (ENP) provided by the German Research Foundation. First, we compared the group of actual ENP applicants to a sample of potential applicants, which revealed a 'lack of low performers' among the actual ENP applicants. Furthermore, we conducted discriminant analyses to predict funding decisions on the basis of several bibliometric indicators.

Get free article suggestions today

Mendeley saves you time finding and organizing research

Sign up here
Already have an account ?Sign in

Find this document

Get full text

Authors

  • Jörg Neufeld

  • Markus von Ins

Cite this document

Choose a citation style from the tabs below