Does incentive provision increase the quality of peer review? An experimental study

Research Policy

Volumn 42, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 287-294

  Squazzoni, Flaminio ^a   Bravo, Giangiacomo ^b,c   Takács, Károly ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRESCIA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TURIN   (Italy)

^c Laboratorio R Revelli Collegio Carlo Alberto   (Italy)

^d Institute of Entrepreneurship and Innovation   (Hungary)

Author keywords

Cooperation; Peer review; Reputation; Science policy; Trust

Indexed keywords

COOPERATION; PEER REVIEW; REPUTATION; SCIENCE POLICIES; TRUST;

ENGINEERING;

EID: 84870328312     PISSN: 00487333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2012.04.014     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. B. Alberts, B. Hanson, and K.L. Kelner Reviewing peer review Science 321 2008 15 (Pubitemid 351956216)
2. I. Almås, A.W. Cappelen, E.O. Sorensen, and B. Tungodden Fairness and the development of inequality acceptance Science 328 2010 1176 1178
3. K.J. Arrow Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention National Bureau of Economic Research The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors 1962 Princeton University Press Princeton, NJ 609 625
4. O.H. Azar The academic review process: how can we make it more efficient? American Economist 50 2006 37 50
5. O.H. Azar Evolution of social norms with heterogeneous preferences: a general model and an application to the academic review process Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 65 2008 420 435
6. J. Berg, J. Dickhaut, and K.A. McCabe Trust, reciprocity and social history Games and Economic Behavior 10 1995 122 142
7. B.-C. Björk, A. Roos, and M. Lauri Scientific journal publishing: yearly volume and open access availability Information Research 14 2009 1 http://informationr.net/ir/14-1/paper391.html
8. R. Boero, G. Bravo, M. Castellani, F. Laganà, and F. Squazzoni Pillars of trust: an experimental study on reputation and its effects Sociological Research Online 14 5 2009 5 http://www.socresonline.org.uk/14/5/5. html
9. A. Bonaccorsi, C. Daraio, and A. Geuna Universities in the new knowledge landscape: tensions, challenges, change: an introduction Minerva 48 2010 1 4
10. L. Bornmann Scientific peer review Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 45 2011 199 245
11. S. Bowles Policies designed for self-interested citizens may undermine "the moral sentiments": evidence from economic experiments Science 320 2008 1605 1609 (Pubitemid 351931245)
12. J. Chang, and C. Lai Is it worthwhile to pay referees? Southern Economic Journal 68 2001 457 463
13. J. Couzin... and how the problems eluded peer reviewers and editors Science 311 2006 614 615
14. J. Crocker, and M.L. Cooper Addressing scientific fraud Science 334 6060 2011 1182
15. P. Dasgupta, and P. David Towards a new economics of science Research Policy 23 1994 487 521
16. P.A. David Can 'open science' be protected from the evolving scheme of IPR protections? Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics 160 1 2004 9 34 (Pubitemid 38614563)
17. G. Ellison The slowdown of the economics publishing process Journal of Political Economy 110 2002 947 993 (Pubitemid 35295025)
18. M. Engers, and J. Gans Why referees are not paid (enough) American Economic Review 88 1998 1341 1349 (Pubitemid 128453603)
19. E. Fehr, and K.M. Schmidt A theory of fairness, competition and cooperation Quarterly Journal of Economics 114 1999 817 868
20. U. Fischbacher z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments Experimental Economics 10 2007 171 178
21. B. Frey, and R. Jegen Motivation crowding theory Journal of Economic Surveys 15 2001 589 611 (Pubitemid 33726798)
22. H. Gintis, S. Bowles, R. Boyd, and E. Fehr Moral Sentiments and Material Interests: The Foundations of Cooperation in Economic Life 2005 The MIT Press Cambridge, MA
23. H. Gintis Strong reciprocity and human sociality Journal of Theoretical Biology 206 2000 169 179
24. H. Gintis The Bounds of Reason: Game Theory and the Unification of the Behavioral Sciences 2009 Princeton University Press Princeton
25. D.W. Grainger Peer review as professional responsibility. A quality control system only as good as the participants Biomaterials 28 2007 5199 5203 (Pubitemid 47488482)
26. B. Greiner An online recruitment system for economic experiments K. Kremer, V. Macho, Forschung und Wissenschaftliches Rechnen 2003 2004 Ges. für Wiss Datenverarbeitung, Göttingen 79 93
27. C. Häussler Information-sharing in academia and the industry: a comparative study Research Policy 40 2011 105 122
28. D. Hamermesh Facts and myths about refereeing The Journal of Economic Perspectives 8 1994 153 163
29. M. Hauser, and E. Fehr An incentive solution to the peer review problem PLoS Biology 5 2007 e107
30. D. Helbing, and S. Balietti How to create an innovation accelerator The European Physical Journal 195 2011 101 136
31. J. Heyman, and D. Ariely Effort for payment: a tale of two markets Psychological Science 15 11 2004 787 793 (Pubitemid 39557996)
32. N.D. Johnson, and A.A. Mislin Trust games: a meta-analysis Journal of Economic Psychology 32 2011 865 889
33. C. Keser Experimental games for the design of reputation management systems IBM System Journal 42 2003 498 506
34. D.N. Laband Is there value-added from the review process in economics? Preliminary evidence from authors The Quarterly Journal of Economics 105 2 1990 341-252
35. N. Lacetera Different missions and commitment power in R&D organizations: theory and evidence on industry-university alliances Organization Science 20 3 2009 565 582
36. M. Lamont How Professors Think: Inside the Curious World of Academic Judgment 2009 Harvard University Press Cambridge, MA
37. R.K. Merton The normative structure of science Journal of Legal and Political Sociology 1 1942 115 126 (Reprinted in The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1973, 267-278)
38. R.K. Merton Priorities in scientific discovery: a chapter in the sociology of science American Sociological Review 22 6 1957 635 659
39. R.K. Merton The Matthew effect in science Science 159 3810 1968 56 63
40. B.D. Neff, and J.O. Olden Is peer review a game of chance? BioScience 56 4 2006 333 340
41. R.R. Nelson The simple economics of basic scientific research Journal of Political Economy 67 3 1959 549 583
42. M.A. Nowak, K.M. Page, and K. Sigmund Fairness versus reason in the ultimatum game Science 289 2000 1773 1775
43. H. Nowotny, H.H. Trute, and A. Schmidt The Public Nature of Science Under Assault: Politics, Markets, Science and the Law 2005 Springer Verlag Berlin
44. A. Ortmann, J. Fitzgerald, and C. Boeing Trust, reciprocity, and social history: a re-examination Experimental Economics 3 2000 81 100
45. E. Ostrom, and J. Walker Trust & Reciprocity: Interdisciplinary Lessons from Experimental Research 2003 Russel Sage Foundation New York
46. J. Pierie, H. Walvoort, and A.J. Overbeke Readers' evaluation of effect of peer review and editing on quality of articles in the Nederland's tijdschrift voor geneeskunde The Lancet 348 1996 1480 1483 (Pubitemid 26400244)
47. R.A. Pollak, and M.L. Watcher The relevance of the household production function and its implications for the allocation of time Journal of Political Economy 83 1 1975 255 277
48. M. Rabin Incorporating fairness into game theory and economics American Economic Review 83 1993 1281 1302
49. M. Roach, and H. Sauermann A taste for science? PhD scientists' academic orientation and self-selection into research careers in industry Research Policy 39 2010 422 434
50. K. Sigmund The Calculus of Selfishness 2010 Princeton University Press Princeton
51. R. Smith Opening up BMJ peer review British Medical Journal 318 4 1999 4 5 (Pubitemid 29188889)
52. F. Squazzoni, and K. Takács Social simulation that 'peers into peer review' Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 14 4 2011 3 http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/14/4/3.html.
53. Squazzoni, F.; 2010. Peering into peer review. Sociologica 3. http://www.sociologica.mulino.it/doi/10.2383/33640.
54. P.E. Stephan The economics of sciences Journal of Economic Literature 34 1996 1199 1235
55. S. Stern Do scientists pay to be scientists? Management Science 60 6 2004 835 853
56. H. van Dalen, and K. Henkens Signals in science: on the importance of signaling in gaining attention in science Scientometrics 64 2 2005 209 233 (Pubitemid 40936936)
57. K.D. Vohs, N.L. Mead, and M.R. Goode The psychological consequences of money Science 314 2006 1154 1156 (Pubitemid 44789047)
58. R. Whitley The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences 1984 Oxford University Press Oxford