Alternatives to peer review: novel approaches for research evaluation

被引：36

作者：

Birukou, Aliaksandr ^{[1
,2
]}

Wakeling, Joseph Rushton ^{[1
]}

Bartolini, Claudio ^{[3
]}

Casati, Fabio ^{[2
]}

Marchese, Maurizio ^{[2
]}

Mirylenka, Katsiaryna ^{[2
]}

Osman, Nardine ^{[4
]}

Ragone, Azzurra ^{[2
,5
]}

Sierra, Carles ^{[4
]}

Wassef, Aalam ^{[6
]}

机构：

[1] European Alliance Innovat, Ghent, Belgium

[2] Univ Trento, Dept Informat Engn & Comp Sci, Trento, Italy

[3] HP Labs, Serv Automat & Integrat Lab, Palo Alto, CA USA

[4] Artificial Intelligence Res Inst IIIA CSIC, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain

[5] Exprivia SpA, Molfetta, Italy

[6] Peerevaluat Org, Paris, France

来源：

FRONTIERS IN COMPUTATIONAL NEUROSCIENCE | 2011年 / 5卷

关键词：

research evaluation; peer review; metrics; bidding; opinions; LiquidPub; UCount; MASKING AUTHOR IDENTITY; PREDICTIVE-VALIDITY; QUALITY; PUBLICATION; SELECTION; SCIENCE; MANUSCRIPTS; ACCEPTANCE; EVOLUTION; FAIRNESS;

D O I：

10.3389/fncom.2011.00056

中图分类号：

Q [生物科学];

学科分类号：

07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;

摘要：

In this paper we review several novel approaches for research evaluation. We start with a brief overview of the peer review, its controversies, and metrics for assessing efficiency and overall quality of the peer review. We then discuss five approaches, including reputation-based ones, that come out of the research carried out by the LiquidPub project and research groups collaborated with LiquidPub. Those approaches are alternative or complementary to traditional peer review. We discuss pros and cons of the proposed approaches and conclude with a vision for the future of the research evaluation, arguing that no single system can suit all stakeholders in various communities.

引用

页数：12

共 50 条

[1] An empirical review of anonymity effects in peer assessment, peer feedback, peer review, peer evaluation and peer grading
Panadero, Ernesto
Alqassab, Maryam
ASSESSMENT & EVALUATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION, 2019, 44 (08) : 1253 - 1278
[2] Mapping the Landscape of Peer Review in Computing Education Research
Petre, Marian
Sanders, Kate
McCartney, Robert
Ahmadzadeh, Marzieh
Connolly, Cornelia
Hamouda, Sally
Harrington, Brian
Lumbroso, Jeremie
Maguire, Joseph
Malmi, Lauri
McGill, Monica M.
Vahrenhold, Jan
ITICSE-WGR'20: PROCEEDINGS OF THE WORKING GROUP REPORTS ON INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY IN COMPUTER SCIENCE EDUCATION, 2020, : 173 - 209
[3] Evaluation of research proposals by peer review panels: broader panels for broader assessments?
Abma-Schouten, Rebecca
Gijbels, Joey
Reijmerink, Wendy
Meijer, Ingeborg
SCIENCE AND PUBLIC POLICY, 2023, 50 (04) : 619 - 632
[4] Key Points of Discussion in Scientific Research Evaluation: Peer Review, Bibliometrics and Relevance
Fernanda Sarthou, Nerina
REVISTA DE ESTUDIOS SOCIALES, 2016, (58) : 76 - 86
[5] The Hawthorne effect in journal peer review
Bornmann, Lutz
SCIENTOMETRICS, 2012, 91 (03) : 857 - 862
[6] The role of peer review in the evaluation of research in Italy. Some remarks on the evaluation of PRINs
Vivarelli, Maurizio
JLIS.IT, 2023, 14 (01): : 121 - 137
[7] Alternatives of Animal Models for Biomedical Research: a Comprehensive Review of Modern Approaches
Vashishat, Abhinav
Patel, Preeti
Gupta, Ghanshyam Das
Kurmi, Balak Das
STEM CELL REVIEWS AND REPORTS, 2024, 20 (04) : 881 - 899
[8] Research Performance Evaluation Approaches and New Evaluation Development
Tahira, Muzammil
Alias, Rose Alinda
Bakri, Aryati
PROCEEDING OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE (KMICE) 2014, VOLS 1 AND 2, 2014, : 237 - 243
[9] From Manuscript Evaluation to Article Valuation: The Changing Technologies of Journal Peer Review
Pontille, David
Torny, Didier
HUMAN STUDIES, 2015, 38 (01) : 57 - 79
[10] Is novel research worth doing? Evidence from peer review at 49 journals
Teplitskiy, Misha
Peng, Hao
Blasco, Andrea
Lakhani, Karim R.
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2022, 119 (47)

← 1 2 3 4 5 →