Key Points of Discussion in Scientific Research Evaluation: Peer Review, Bibliometrics and Relevance

被引：7
|
作者：
Fernanda Sarthou, Nerina [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构：
[1] Univ Nacl San Martin, Ciencia Polit, Buenos Aires, DF, Argentina
[2] Consejo Nacl Invest Cient & Tecn, RA-1033 Buenos Aires, DF, Argentina
[3] Univ Nacl Ctr Prov, Buenos Aires, DF, Argentina
来源：
REVISTA DE ESTUDIOS SOCIALES | 2016年 / 58期
关键词：
Bibliometrics (Thesaurus); research evaluation; peer review; relevance (Author's keywords); SCIENCE; IMPACT; POLICY; STATE; BIAS;
D O I：
10.7440/res58.2016.06
中图分类号：
D58 [社会生活与社会问题]; C913 [社会生活与社会问题];
学科分类号：
摘要：
This article seeks to bring together in a single document the set of issues surrounding the definition and implementation of mechanisms and criteria relating to the evaluation of scientific research. It revisits and orders the basic agreements regarding their defects and the proposals for countering them based on a bibliographical review revolving around three questions: who participates in the assessment; how the assessment is carried out; and what is to be evaluated. Finally, it briefly presents some notes referring to the specific literature generated from Latin America, highlighting the limited space dedicated to this topic until now.
引用
收藏
页码：76 / 86
页数：11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Research into peer review and scientific publication: Journals look in the mirror
    Callaham, ML
    ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2002, 40 (03) : 313 - 316
  • [22] What is the role of peer review in protecting the integrity of scientific research?
    Qin, Na
    ABSTRACTS OF PAPERS OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY, 2015, 250
  • [23] The influences of integrating reading, peer evaluation, and discussion on undergraduate students' scientific writing
    Deng, Yang
    Kelly, Gregory J.
    Deng, Shili
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION, 2019, 41 (10) : 1408 - 1433
  • [24] A new Form for the Evaluation of Scientific Articles under Peer Review
    Sabaj Meruane, Omar
    Gonzalez Vergara, Carlos
    Varas Espinoza, German
    Pina-Stranger, Alvaro
    ARGOS, 2015, 32 (62) : 119 - 130
  • [25] Just an artifact? The concordance between peer review and bibliometrics in economics and statistics in the Italian research assessment exercise
    Baccini, Alberto
    De Nicolao, Giuseppe
    QUANTITATIVE SCIENCE STUDIES, 2022, 3 (01): : 194 - 207
  • [26] The Ninth International Congress on Peer Review and Scientific Publication: A Call for Research
    Ioannidis, John P. A.
    Berkwits, Michael
    Flanagin, Annette
    Godlee, Fiona
    Bloom, Theodora
    JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2019, 322 (17): : 1658 - 1660
  • [27] A Scientific Review of Research and Evaluation of Probiotics Efficacy
    Journal of Chinese Institute of Food Science and Technology, 2023, 23 (05) : 444 - 455
  • [28] Why citizen review might beat peer review at identifying pursuitworthy scientific research
    Santana, Carlos
    STUDIES IN HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE, 2022, 92 : 20 - 26
  • [29] Blinding Models for Scientific Peer-Review of Biomedical Research Proposals: A Systematic Review
    Qussini, Seba
    MacDonald, Ross S.
    Shahbal, Saad
    Dierickx, Kris
    JOURNAL OF EMPIRICAL RESEARCH ON HUMAN RESEARCH ETHICS, 2023, 18 (04) : 250 - 262
  • [30] Alternatives to peer review: novel approaches for research evaluation
    Birukou, Aliaksandr
    Wakeling, Joseph Rushton
    Bartolini, Claudio
    Casati, Fabio
    Marchese, Maurizio
    Mirylenka, Katsiaryna
    Osman, Nardine
    Ragone, Azzurra
    Sierra, Carles
    Wassef, Aalam
    FRONTIERS IN COMPUTATIONAL NEUROSCIENCE, 2011, 5
12345