Selecting scientific excellence through committee peer review - A citation analysis of previous publications by successful and non-successful post-doctoral research fellowship applicants

Proceedings of ISSI 2005: 10th International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics

Volumn 1, Issue , 2005, Pages 343-351

  Bornmann, Lutz ^a   Daniel, Hans Dieter ^b  

^a ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 26444548795     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (37)

1. Balaban, A. T. (1996). How should citations to articles in high- and low-impact journals be evaluated, or what is a citation worth? Scientometrics, 37(3), 495-498.
2. Beaver, D. B. (2004). Does collaborative research have greater epistemic authority? Scientometrics, 60(3), 399-408.
3. Blossfeld, H.-P., & Rohwer, G. (2002). Techniques of event history modeling. New approaches to causal analysis (Vol. 2). Mahwah, NJ, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
4. Boehringer Ingelheim Fonds. (1999). A foundation in progress. Stuttgart, Germany: Boehringer Ingelheim Fonds (B.I.F.).
5. Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H.-D. (2004). Reliability, fairness and predictive validity of committee peer review. Evaluation of the selection of post-graduate fellowship holders by the Boehringer Ingelheim Fonds. B.I.F. Futura, 19, 7-19.
6. Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H.-D. (2005). Selection of research fellowship recipients by committee peer review. Analysis of reliability, fairness and predictive validity of Board of Trustees' decisions. Scientometrics, 63(2), 297-320.
7. Chapman, G. B., & McCauley, C. (1994). Predictive validity of quality ratings of National Science Foundation graduate fellows. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54(2), 428-438.
8. Cole, J. R. (2000). A short history of the use of citations as a measure of the impact of scientific and scholarly work. In B. Cronin & H. B. Atkins (Eds.), The web of knowledge. A festschrift in honor of Eugene Garfield (pp. 281-300). Medford, New Jersey, USA: Information Today.
9. Daniel, H.-D. (1993). Guardians of science. Fairness and reliability of peer review. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH.
10. Daniel, H.-D. (2005). Publications as a measure of scientific advancement and of scientists' productivity. Learned Publishing, 18(2), 143-148.
11. Ehses, I. (2004). By scientists, for scientists. The Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) - and how it functions. B.I.F. Futura, 19, 170-177.
12. Enders, J., & Bornmann, L. (2001). Karriere mit Doktortitel? Ausbildung, Berufsverlauf und Berufserfolg von Promovierten. Frankfurt am Main: Campus.
13. Fröhlich, H. (2001). It all depends on the individuals. Research promotion - a balanced system of control. B.I.F Futura, 16, 69-77.
14. Garfield, E. (1979). Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool. Scientometrics, 1(4), 359-375.
15. Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (1993). A characterization of scientometric distributions based on harmonic means. Scientometrics, 26(1), 81-96.
16. Guston, D. H. (2003). The expanding role of peer review processes in the United States. In P. Shapira & S. Kuhlmann (Eds.), Learning from science and technology policy evaluation. Experiences from the United States and Europe (pp. 81-97). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
17. Hosmer, D. W., & Lemeshow, S. (2000). Applied logistic regression (2. ed.). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
18. Huber, P. J. (2003). Robust statistics. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
19. Kostoff, R. N. (1997). The principles and practices of peer review. Science and Engineering Ethics, 3(1), 19-34.
20. Lange, L. L. (2001). Citation counts of multi-authored papers - first-named authors and further authors. Scientometrics, 52(3), 457-470.
21. Lindsey, D. (1980). Production and citation measures in the sociology of science - the problem of multiple authorship. Social Studies of Science, 10(2), 145-162.
22. Lock, S. (1985). A difficult balance: editorial peer review in medicine. Philadelphia, PA, USA: ISI Press.
23. Long, J. S., & Freese, J. (2003). Regression models for categorical dependent variables using Stata. College Station, Texas, USA: Stata Press, Stata Corporation.
24. Mavis, B., & Katz, M. (2003). Evaluation of a program supporting scholarly productivity for new investigators. Academic Medicine, 78(7), 757-765.
25. Rabe-Hesketh, S., & Everitt, B. (2004). A handbook of statistical analyses using Stata. Boca Raton, UK: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
26. Shadish, W. R. (1989). The perception and evaluation of quality in science. In B. Gholson, W. R. Shadish, R. A. Neimeyer & A. C. Houts (Eds.), Psychology of science. Contributions to metascience (pp. 383-426). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
27. StataCorp. (2003). Stata statistical software: release 8. College Station, Texas, USA: Stata Corporation.
28. Tainer, J. A. (1991). Science, citation, and funding. Science, 251(5000), 1408.
29. Tregenza, T. (2002). Gender bias in the refereeing process? Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 17(8), 349-350.
30. Ulrich's Periodicals Directory. (2004). The global source for periodicals. New Providence, NJ, USA: R.R. Bowker
31. van Raan, A. F. J. (1999). Advanced bibliometric methods for the evaluation of universities. Scientometrics, 45(3), 417-423.
32. van Raan, A. F. J. (2004). Measuring science. Capita selecta of current main issues. In H. F. Moed, W. Glänzel & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research. The use of publication and patent statistics in studies of S&T systems (pp. 19-50). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
33. Vinkler, P. (1986). Evaluation of some methods for the relative assessment of scientific publications. Scientometrics, 10(3-4), 157-177.
34. Vinkler, P. (1997). Relations of relative scientometric impact indicators. The relative publication strategy index. Scientometrics, 40(1), 163-169.
35. Wellcome Trust. (2001). Review of Wellcome Trust PhD research training. Career paths of a 1988 - 1990 prize student cohort. London, UK: Wellcome Trust.
36. Wilson, J. D. (1978). Peer review and publication. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 61(4), 1697-1701.
37. Ziman, J. (2000). Real science. What it is, and what it means. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.