How good is a model based on bibliometric indicators in predicting the final decisions made by peers?

This paper shows how bibliometric models can be used to assist peers in selecting candidates for academic openings.

[1]  Massimo Franceschet,et al.  The first Italian research assessment exercise: A bibliometric perspective , 2009, J. Informetrics.

[2]  Vicente P. Guerrero-Bote,et al.  A new approach to the metric of journals' scientific prestige: The SJR indicator , 2010, J. Informetrics.

[3]  D. Aksnes,et al.  Peer reviews and bibliometric indicators: a comparative study at a Norwegian university , 2004 .

[4]  Elizabeth S. Vieira,et al.  Definition of a model based on bibliometric indicators for assessing applicants to academic positions , 2014, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[5]  Kenneth E. Train,et al.  Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation , 2016 .

[6]  Jim Taylor,et al.  The Assessment of Research Quality in UK Universities: Peer Review or Metrics? , 2011 .

[7]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  Scientific peer review , 2011, Annu. Rev. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[8]  Nigel W. Bond,et al.  A multilevel cross‐classified modelling approach to peer review of grant proposals: the effects of assessor and researcher attributes on assessor ratings , 2003 .

[9]  D. Cicchetti.  The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigation , 1991, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[10]  Nigel W. Bond,et al.  A new reader trial approach to peer review in funding research grants: An Australian experiment , 2006, Scientometrics.

[11]  Barbara Howell,et al.  The Reliability of Peer Reviews of Papers on Information Systems , 2004, J. Inf. Sci..

[12]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  Convergent validation of peer review decisions using the h index: Extent of and reasons for type I and type II errors , 2007, J. Informetrics.

[13]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  Selecting scientific excellence through committee peer review - A citation analysis of publications previously published to approval or rejection of post-doctoral research fellowship applicants , 2006, Scientometrics.

[14]  Emanuela Reale,et al.  Peer review for the evaluation of academic research: lessons from the Italian experience , 2007 .

[15]  Nigel W. Bond,et al.  Peer review process: Assessments by applicant-nominated referees are biased, inflated, unreliable and invalid , 2007 .

[16]  Anthony F. J. van Raan,et al.  Peer review and bibliometric indicators of scientific performance: A comparison of cum laude doctorates with ordinary doctorates in physics , 1987, Scientometrics.

[17]  L. Bornmann,et al.  Does the Committee Peer Review Select the Best Applicants for Funding? An Investigation of the Selection Process for Two European Molecular Biology Organization Programmes , 2008, PloS one.

[18]  Elizabeth S. Vieira,et al.  An impact indicator for researchers , 2011, Scientometrics.

[19]  H. Marsh,et al.  Improving the Peer-review Process for Grant Applications , 2022 .

[20]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  Selection of research fellowship recipients by committee peer review. Reliability, fairness and predictive validity of Board of Trustees' decisions , 2005, Scientometrics.

[21]  Henk F. Moed,et al.  Measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals , 2009, J. Informetrics.

[22]  L. Bornmann,et al.  A Reliability-Generalization Study of Journal Peer Reviews: A Multilevel Meta-Analysis of Inter-Rater Reliability and Its Determinants , 2010, PloS one.

[23]  C Hodgson.  How reliable is peer review? An examination of operating grant proposals simultaneously submitted to two similar peer review systems. , 1997, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[24]  Nigel W. Bond,et al.  Peer Review in the Funding of Research in Higher Education: The Australian Experience , 2001 .

[25]  Ed J. Rinia,et al.  COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF A SET OF BIBLIOMETRIC INDICATORS AND CENTRAL PEER REVIEW CRITERIA. EVALUATION OF CONDENSED MATTER PHYSICS IN THE NETHERLANDS , 1998 .

[26]  Anthony F. J. van Raan.  Comparison of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judgment for 147 chemistry research groups , 2013, Scientometrics.