Formulating research policy on expert advice

Tombazos, Christis G.; Dobra, Matthew

doi:10.1016/j.euroecorev.2014.10.001

Cited by 8 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, they only disclose the names of a small subgroup of these experts. This explains why, in our recent study of expert bias in the main assessment of journals in economics under the ERA (see Tombazos & Dobra, ), we are forced to adopt as much of an indirect approach as earlier studies. In particular, we investigate bias by regressing the decisions of the complete panel of experts on the characteristics of a small subgroup of these experts whose names have been disclosed by the ERA (while accounting for objective measures of journal quality).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Expert Decisions

Dobra

Tombazos

2019

Decision Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

National Research Assessments are used by countries to improve their research quality. They rely on experts to evaluate research, and use their assessments to reward publications. It is widely assumed that experts bring to the process the kind of judgment and knowledge that transcends their observable characteristics. We show that, for the most part, they do not. Using a unique uncensored dataset of expert deliberations, we find that 90% of expert decisions can be inferred from publicly available information, notably experts' CVs. We also find that about half of their decisions are driven by objective quality standards and the other half by cognitive biases.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Building on these findings, recent contributions have turned their attention to the role of bias in expert decisions (e.g., Clerides, Pashardes, & Polycarpou, ; Tombazos & Dobra, ). Relevant studies share key attributes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Expert Decisions

Dobra

Tombazos

2019

Decision Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…see Evidence 2007;Levitt & Thelwall, 2008;THE 2011). Although most NRAEs rely primarily on peer review, advances in bibliometric analysis, concerns about the time and cost of peer review, and recent studies outlining possible bias in adjudication processes (Clerides et al, 2011;Taylor, 2011;Tombazos & Dobra, 2014) suggest an increasing reliance on bibliometrics over time. The same arguments apply to within-discipline categories.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These concerns have been heightened by the emergence of national research assessment exercises (NRAEs), based, in part, on the direct and/or indirect use of bibliometrics, to measure research performance across institutions and to allocate funds accordingly (OECD 2010;Abramo et al, 2011;Sgroi & Oswald, 2013). Although most NRAEs rely primarily on peer review, advances in bibliometric analysis, concerns about the time and cost of peer review, and recent studies outlining possible bias in adjudication processes (Clerides et al, 2011;Taylor, 2011;Tombazos & Dobra, 2014) suggest an increasing reliance on bibliometrics over time. However, it must be noted that a key feature of all NRAEs is the time limitation placed on measurable research output: generally ranging from five to seven years (assume six years hereafter).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Citation‐Capture Rates for Economics Journals: Do they Differ from Other Disciplines and Does it Matter?

Anderson

Tressler

2015

J of App Econs and Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper compares the rate of citation-capture across the social sciences, sciences, business school disciplines and economics. It also explores differences in the rate of citation-capture between leading journals in economics and a representative science category, and between higher and lower ranked economics journals. Short-term citation counting as used in impact factors and journal ranking schemes is shown to favour sciences over social sciences. In addition, within economics, short-term impact factors are systematically biased towards lower ranked journals. Our results imply that the use of leading multidisciplinary journal rankings as a proxy for direct citations introduces an unreported bias in research assessment. Such biases are in addition to those attributable to the well-known differences in the total number of cites received by papers across various disciplines.

show abstract

“…Coughlin, ; Frisell, ; Austin and Wilcox, ; Tombazos and Dobra, ; Kirchgässner, ; Hillman and Ursprung, ; Fuest, .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

How to Handle the Fiscal Crisis in Greece: Empirical Evidence Based on a Survey of Economic Experts

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We asked economic experts polled by the CESifo World Economic Survey how to handle the fiscal crisis in Greece in the year 2015. The sample includes about 850 experts from 110 countries. We find systematic differences in experts’ recommendations. Our results suggest that policy advice is related to an expert's personal and country‐level attributes. Country‐level characteristics, especially credit default swaps as a measure of fiscal stability, predict views on whether Greece should exit the eurozone. An expert's educational background, age and professional affiliation predict opinions on the credit programmes of the International Monetary Fund. We propose that policymakers who seek balanced policy advice should consult experts from different countries and personal backgrounds.

show abstract

Formulating research policy on expert advice

Cited by 8 publications

References 43 publications

Expert Decisions

Expert Decisions

Citation‐Capture Rates for Economics Journals: Do they Differ from Other Disciplines and Does it Matter?

How to Handle the Fiscal Crisis in Greece: Empirical Evidence Based on a Survey of Economic Experts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About