Definition of a model based on bibliometric indicators for assessing applicants to academic positions

A model based on a set of bibliometric indicators is proposed for the prediction of the ranking of applicants to an academic position as produced by a committee of peers. The results show that a very small number of indicators may lead to a robust prediction of about 75% of the cases.

[1]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  Diversity, value and limitations of the journal impact factor and alternative metrics , 2012, Rheumatology International.

[2]  J. I. Reppun.  Peer Review , 2014, MTZ worldwide.

[3]  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.

[4]  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.

[5]  Nils T. Hagen,et al.  Harmonic Allocation of Authorship Credit: Source-Level Correction of Bibliometric Bias Assures Accurate Publication and Citation Analysis , 2008, PloS one.

[6]  S. Brush.  The Earth's Cores , 1981, Nature.

[7]  Dennis Fok,et al.  A rank-ordered logit model with unobserved heterogeneity in ranking capabilities. , 2007 .

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

[9]  R. Rousseau,et al.  Fractional counts for authorship attribution: a numerical study , 1995 .

[10]  W. Weeks,et al.  Changes in authorship patterns in prestigious US medical journals. , 2004, Social science & medicine.

[11]  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.

[12]  D. King.  The scientific impact of nations , 2004, Nature.

[13]  Dag W. Aksnes,et al.  A macro study of self-citation , 2003, Scientometrics.

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

[15]  Guido Van Hooydonk.  Fractional Counting of Multiauthored Publications: Consequences for the Impact of Authors , 1997, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[16]  Susan Bonzi,et al.  Motivations for citation: A comparison of self citation and citation to others , 1991, Scientometrics.

[17]  E. Wagenmakers,et al.  AIC model selection using Akaike weights , 2004, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[18]  S. Hodge,et al.  Publication Credit , 1981, Science.

[19]  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.

[20]  J. Hausman.  Specification tests in econometrics , 1978 .

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

[22]  Guido Van Hooydonk,et al.  Fractional Counting of Multiauthored Publications: Consequences for the Impact of Authors , 1997, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[23]  Elizabeth S. Vieira,et al.  A comparison of Scopus and Web of Science for a typical university , 2009, Scientometrics.

[24]  Mônica G. Campiteli,et al.  An index to quantify an individual's scientific research valid across disciplines , 2005 .

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

[27]  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 .

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

[29]  Charles Oppenheim,et al.  Citation counts and the Research Assessment Exercise V: Archaeology and the 2001 RAE , 2003, J. Documentation.

[30]  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.

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

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

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

[34]  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.

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

[36]  Mônica G. Campiteli,et al.  Is it possible to compare researchers with different scientific interests? , 2006, Scientometrics.

[37]  John P. A. Ioannidis,et al.  Measuring Co-Authorship and Networking-Adjusted Scientific Impact , 2008, PloS one.

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

[39]  John Antonakis,et al.  Quantifying Scholarly Impact: IQp Versus the Hirsch h , 2008, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

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

[41]  John P.A. Ioannidis,et al.  Inflated numbers of authors over time have not been just due to increasing research complexity. , 2008, Journal of clinical epidemiology.