Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture ›› 2022, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (2): 88-101.doi: 10.13998/j.cnki.issn1002-1248.21-0528
Previous Articles Next Articles
WAN Hao1, ZHANG Fujun2, LV Qianqian3
CLC Number:
| [1] PRICE D J D. Little science, big science-and beyond[M]. New York: Columbia university press, 1986. [2] 万昊, 谭宗颖, 朱相丽. 同行评议与文献计量在科研评价中的作用分析比较[J]. 图书情报工作, 2017, 61(1): 134-152. WAN H, TAN Z Y, ZHU X L.Comparison of the role of peer review and bibliometrics in research evaluation[J]. Library and informationservice, 2017, 61(1): 134-152. [3] MERTON R K.Social theory and social structure[M]. New York: Free press, 1968. [4] 姜春林, 张立伟, 刘学. 中外同行评议研究现状及问题探讨[J]. 科技管理研究, 2015(3): 163-166. JIANG C L, ZHANG L W, LIU X.The status quo of peer review research and its problems[J]. Science and technology management research, 2015(3): 163-166. [5] 盛怡瑾, 初景利. 同行评议质量控制方法研究进展[J]. 出版科学,2018, 26(5): 48-55. SHENG Y J, CHU J L.Research progress of peer review quality control method[J]. Publishing journal, 2018, 26(5): 48-55. [6] CARTER B.Peer review a good but flawed system[J]. Journal of child health care, 2017, 21(3): 233-235. [7] WESSELY S, WOOD F.Peer review of grant applications: A systematic review[M]//, GODLEE F, JEFFERSON T. Peer review in health sciences, London: British medical journal books, 1999. [8] MAVIS B, KATZ M.Evaluation of a program supporting scholarly productivity for new investigators[J]. Academic medicine, 2003, 78(7): 757-765. [9] BORNMANN L, DANIEL H D.Convergent validation of peer review decisions using the h index. Extent of and reasons for type I and type II errors[J]. Journal of informetrics, 2007, 1(3): 204-213. [10] BORNMANN L, WALLON G, LEDIN A.Does the committee peer review select the best applicants for funding? An investigation of the selection process for two european molecular biology organization programmes[J]. PLoS ONE, 2008, 3(10): E3480. [11] NEUFELD J, VON INS M.Informed peer review and uninformed bibliometrics?[J]. Research evaluation, 2011, 20(1): 31-46. [12] LI D, AGHA L.Big names or big ideas: Do peer review panels select the best science proposals?[J]. Science, 2015, 348(6233): 434-438. [13] MELIN G, DANELL R.The top eight percent: Development of approved and rejected applicants for a prestigious grant in Sweden[J]. Science and public policy, 2006, 33(10): 702-712. [14] HORNBOSTEL S, BOHMER S, KLINGSPORN B, et al.Funding of young scientist and scientific excellence[J]. Scientometrics, 2009,79(1): 171-190. [15] VAN DEN BESSELAAR P, LEYDESDORFF L. Past performance, peer review, and project selection: A case study in the social and behavioral sciences[J]. Research evaluation, 2009, 18(4): 273-288. [16] BORNMANN L, LEYDESDORFF L, VAN DEN BESSELAAR P. A meta-evaluation of scientific research proposals: Different ways of comparing rejected to awarded applications[J]. Journal of informetrics, 2010, 4(3): 211-220. [17] BUXTON M, HANNEY S, MORRIS S, et al.Medical research - What's it worth? Estimating the economic benefits from medical research in the UK[R]. Health economics research group, office of health economics & rand, Europe, London: UK evaluation forum, 2008. [18] MACILWAIN C.Science economics: What science is really worth?[J]. Nature, 2010, 465(10): 682-684. [19] 王海宁, 李姗姗, 栾贞增. 高校科研成果转化能力与效率关系评价——基于2016年教育部直属61所高校的实证研究[J]. 科技管理研究, 2018, 406, 38(12): 147-154. WANG H N, LI S S, LUAN Z Z. Evaluation on the relationship between transformation ability and efficiency of scientific research achievements in colleges and universities: An empirical study of 61 universities directly under the chinese ministry of education in2016[J]. Science and technology management research, 2018, 406,38(12): 147-154. [20] HAZELKORN E.European commission: Expert group on assessment of university-based research, assessing Europe's university based research[R]. Dublin institute of technology, centre for social and educational research, 2010. [21] IVANOVA I A, LEYDESDORFF L.Knowledge-generating efficiency in innovation systems the acceleration of technological paradigm changes with increasing complexity[J]. Technological forecasting &social change, 2015, 96: 254-265. [22] SALTER A J, MARTIN B R.The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: a critical review[J]. Research policy, 2001,30(3): 509-532. |
|
||
