Research Commons
      • Browse 
        • Communities & Collections
        • Titles
        • Authors
        • By Issue Date
        • Subjects
        • Types
        • Series
      • Help 
        • About
        • Collection Policy
        • OA Mandate Guidelines
        • Guidelines FAQ
        • Contact Us
      • My Account 
        • Sign In
        • Register
      View Item 
      •   Research Commons
      • University of Waikato Research
      • Management
      • Management Papers
      • View Item
      •   Research Commons
      • University of Waikato Research
      • Management
      • Management Papers
      • View Item
      JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

      Evaluating research – peer review team assessment and journal based bibliographic measures: New Zealand PBRF research output scores in 2006

      Anderson, David L.; Smart, Warren; Tressler, John
      DOI
       10.1080/00779954.2013.772879
      Link
       www.tandfonline.com
      Find in your library  
      Citation
      Export citation
      Anderson, D. L., Smart, W. & Tressler, J. (2013). Evaluating research – peer review team assessment and journal based bibliographic measures: New Zealand PBRF research output scores in 2006. New Zealand Economic Papers, 47(2), 140-157.
      Permanent Research Commons link: https://hdl.handle.net/10289/7915
      Abstract
      This paper concerns the relationship between the assessment of the research of individual academics by peer or expert review teams with a variety of bibliometric schemes based on journal quality weights. Specifically, for a common group of economists from New Zealand departments of economics the relationship between Performance-Based Research Fund (PBRF) Research Output measures for those submitting new research portfolios in 2006 are compared with evaluations of journal-based research over the 2000–2005 assessment period. This comparison identifies the journal weighting schemes that appear most similar to PBRF peer evaluations. The paper provides an indication of the ‘power or aggressiveness’ of PBRF evaluations in terms of the weighting given to quality. The implied views of PBRF peer review teams are also useful in assessing common assumptions made in evaluating journal based research.
      Date
      2013
      Type
      Journal Article
      Publisher
      Routledge
      Collections
      • Management Papers [1136]
      Show full item record  

      Usage

       
       
       

      Usage Statistics

      For this itemFor all of Research Commons

      The University of Waikato - Te Whare Wānanga o WaikatoFeedback and RequestsCopyright and Legal Statement