Related papers: Past performance, peer review, and project selecti…
Competitive allocation of research funding is a major mechanism within the science system. It is fundamentally based on the idea of peer review. Peer review is central in project selection as peers are considered to be in a unique position…
Combining different data sets with information on grant and fellowship applications submitted to two renowned funding agencies, we are able to compare their funding decisions (award and rejection) with scientometric performance indicators…
Gender bias in grant allocation is a deviation from the principle that scientific merit should guide grant decisions. However, most studies on gender bias in grant allocation focus on gender differences in success rates, without including…
Obtaining funding is an important part of becoming a successful scientist. Junior faculty spend a great deal of time finding the right agencies and programs that best match their research profile. But what are the factors that influence the…
In this paper peer review reliability is investigated based on peer ratings of research teams at two Belgian universities. It is found that outcomes can be substantially influenced by the different ways in which experts attribute ratings.…
Scientific research funding is allocated largely through a system of soliciting and ranking competitive grant proposals. In these competitions, the proposals themselves are not the deliverables that the funder seeks, but instead are used by…
Bias in grant allocation is a critical issue, as the expectation is that grants are given to the best researchers, and not to applicants that are socially, organizationally, or topic-wise near-by the decision-makers. In this paper, we…
Narrative reviews of peer review research have concluded that there is negligible evidence of gender bias in the awarding of grants based on peer review. Here, we report the findings of a meta-analysis of 21 studies providing, to the…
Interdisciplinary research is fundamental when it comes to tackling complex problems in our highly interlinked world, and is on the rise globally. Yet, it is unclear why--in an increasingly competitive academic environment--one should…
The literature on gender differences in research performance seems to suggest a gap between men and women, where the former outperform the latter. Whether one agrees with the different factors proposed to explain the phenomenon, it is…
The literature on the theme of gender differences in research performance indicates a quite evident gap in favor of men over women. Beyond the understanding of the factors that could be at the basis of this phenomenon, it is worthwhile…
This paper describes the method for ex-post peer review evaluation per research discipline used at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) and summarizes the outcomes obtained from it. The method produces pertinent advice and triggers…
Many governments have placed priority on excellence in higher education as part of their policy agendas. Processes for recruitment and career advancement in universities thus have a critical role. The efficiency of faculty selection…
In reaction to a previous critique(Opthof & Leydesdorff, 2010), the Center for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS) in Leiden proposed to change their old "crown" indicator in citation analysis into a new one. Waltman et al. (2011)argue…
Over the last decade proposal success rates in the fundamental sciences have dropped significantly. Astronomy and related fields funded by NASA and NSF are no exception. Data across agencies show that this is not principally the result of a…
US funding agencies alone distribute a yearly total of roughly $65B dollars largely through the process of proposal peer review: scientists compete for project funding by submitting grant proposals which are evaluated by selected panels of…
Peer review is the primary means of quality control in academia; as an outcome of a peer review process, program and area chairs make acceptance decisions for each paper based on the review reports and scores they received. Quality of…
The peer review system has been traditionally challenged due to its many limitations especially for allocating funding. Bibliometric indicators may well present themselves as a complement. Objective: We analyze the relationship between…
Peer review is the most common mechanism in place for assessing requests for resources in a large variety of scientific disciplines. One of the strongest criticisms to this paradigm is the limited reproducibility of the process, especially…
In a recent study by Ginther et al., the probability of receiving a U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) RO1 award was related to the applicant's race/ethnicity. The results indicate black/African-American applicants were 10% less…