THE VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF EVALUATION OF SCHOLARLY PERFORMANCE
Generate an AI Snapshot to get a quick, structured summary of this paper.
A concise AI-generated summary of the paper will appear here once you click Generate AI Snapshot.
Abstract
A survey is given of the merits of the contributions of peer review and bibliometric methods to evaluation in science. First, the role of evaluation in the scientific process is outlined, with a focus on the evaluation of research proposals and research products such as journal manuscripts. An analysis is made of the validity and reliability of both peer review and citation and publication measures of research performance. The evidence indicates that in all phases of research the outcomes of peer review are usually more than fifty per cent due to chance. It is much easier to cope with random error in bibliometric evaluation. Validity studies of citation measures have, in majority, dealt with more or less eminent scholars. Recent research has shown that bibliometric indicators are also capable of discriminating among starting scholars. Finally, the use and limitations of bibliometric indicators in the humanities and the social and behavioral sciences is discussed.
