Year: 2013
Type: article
Abstract: Academic success or ability is often assessed through peer review or the seemingly more objective method of citation ratings. However, citation ratings may be more objective in that they offer a more automated or mechanical method of assessing quality, but it does not necessarily follow that these ratings provide an assessment of genuine scientific impact. Likewise, although peer review may provide an effective filtering system, it cannot be assumed that it provides objective critiques. This review discusses the fetishes and flaws of both methods, and suggests that future reviewing methods should involve both quantitative and qualitative methods, tailored to the specific individual subject area.
Source: Springer Science Reviews
Author: Jennifer A. Foley
Institution: National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery
Language: English
Subfield: Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty
Field: Decision Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: hybrid
OpenAlex ID: W2021709961