<i>Peerless Science: Peer Review and US Science Policy</i>

Chubin, Daryl E.; Hackett, Edward J.; Treiman, S. B.

doi:10.1063/1.2810292

Cited by 67 publications

(81 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Hence contributions to certain high impact journals will follow a certain ideological strands. This effect has already been studied by Chubin and Hackett (1990;2003) and Crane (1976) and it is summarized by Lamont (2009, p. 2) as "Peers monitor the flow of people and ideas through the various gates of the academic community... and some peers are given more of a voice than others, and serve as gatekeepers more often than others". In this respect, one comment we can make relevant to T&I Studies comes from our direct personal experience.…”

Section: Spanish Scholarsmentioning

confidence: 98%

A contrastive analysis of the main benchmarking tools for research assessment in translation and interpreting: the Spanish approach

Rovira-Esteva

Orero

2011

Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research assessment has become one of the most taxing exercises that scholars have to endure on a regular basis. Publications seem to be the currency used nowadays for everything from: getting funds for a PhD, to gaining access to an academic post and indeed promotion. Research assessment results are also of key importance in university departments, as funding and resources are increasingly linked to research results. In the Department of Translation and Interpreting at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona a pro-active policy has been adopted with the aim of improving results from research activities at all levels. Within this context we put together a list of T&I (Translation and Interpreting) journals and joined efforts with our colleagues in the Library of Humanities of our university to include information about where these journals are indexed. While gathering the information for the list certain doubts, questions, and patterns emerged, at the same time we were continuously surprised by the results that emerged during the course of the assessment exercise.Based on the data collected regarding T&I journals along with the existing assessment requirements made public by the various Catalan and Spanish quality agencies, we analysed the objective parameters that are taken into consideration when evaluating research. In writing this article we had three main goals: first, to gain a deeper understanding of the current research practices concerning publications within T&I; second, to carry out a bottom-up analysis and offer concrete data concerning average number of pages, average number of authors per article, authors ordering and research output format and performance of scholars affiliated to Spanish universities in terms of high impact contributions. Finally, we wanted to reflect upon the real life application of the common assessment criteria.

show abstract

Section: Spanish Scholarsmentioning

confidence: 98%

A contrastive analysis of the main benchmarking tools for research assessment in translation and interpreting: the Spanish approach

Rovira-Esteva

Orero

2011

Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In general, it is recognized that peer or expert surveys have various limitations and shortcomings. In particular, the outcomes of a peer review process may contain errors nearly 50 % because of human chance and randomness [14][15][16]. However, patents can be regarded as realizations of technologies, and patent statistics would therefore be sufficient for TLEs [17,18].…”

Section: The Demands For Data-based Tlesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technological-level evaluation using patent statistics: model and application in mobile communications

Cho

Park

2014

Cluster Comput

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Information and communication technology (ICT) has been a driving force of development for knowledgebased economies. In particular, as competition in mobile communications technological innovation among nations becomes more intense, there are growing demands for improved evaluation, judgment, and prediction of mobile communications technological capability in order to improve national ICT competitiveness. Technological capability refers to conceptual-level elements that capture technological competitiveness in operation. A technological level can be defined for making comparisons of one technological capability with another. Patent statistics have been used by economists and researchers in the field of innovation to analyze current and forecast technological directions. This paper evaluates relative technological capability in terms of patent statistics for some technology domains. We propose a patent statistic model for relative technological capability based on patent activity, intensity, market-power, and citation index for mobile communications technologies at a national level. In particular, it gives a technological-level evaluation of 3G, 3G transitional, and 4G mobile communications for the US, EU, Japan, China, and Korea.

show abstract

“…In the course of describing those transformations I have also presented evidence of a widespread and growing conviction among the members of those very communities that the resulting institutional apparatus of contemporary scientific inquiry has erected severe and/or unprecedented obstacles to the pursuit of genuinely revolutionary, transformative, or unorthodox scientific theorizing. Moreover, in recent decades a wide and growing range of writers on science policy have either expressed mounting concern regarding what they see as the excessive and/or increasing intellectual and theoretical conservatism engendered by the contemporary institutional apparatus of peer-reviewed grant proposals for particular projects in academic science or reported such concerns to be widespread among scientists, reviewers, and administrators themselves (e.g., Roy 1985;Horrobin 1990;Chubin and Hackett 1990;Travis and Collins 1991;Wesseley 1998;Shatz 2004;Braben 2004;Luukkonen 2012;Lee et al 2013). As Luukkonen reports in her review of this literature, the majority of the research on peer review concludes that it is inherently conservative and unable to select truly innovative research proposals [references omitted].…”

Section: Bush's Nightmarementioning

confidence: 99%

Unconceived alternatives and conservatism in science: the impact of professionalization, peer-review, and Big Science

Stanford

2015

Synthese

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scientific realists have suggested that changes in our scientific communities over the course of their history have rendered those communities progressively less vulnerable to the problem of unconcieved alternatives over time. I argue in response not only that the most fundamental historical transformations of the scientific enterprise have generated steadily mounting obstacles to revolutionary, transformative, or unorthodox scientific theorizing, but also that we have substantial independent evidence that the institutional apparatus of contemporary scientific inquiry fosters an exceedingly and increasingly theoretically conservative form of that inquiry. I conclude that contemporary scientific communities are actually more vulnerable to the problem of unconceived alternatives than their historical predecessors, and I briefly suggest how we might seek to pursue scientific inquiry in a less theoretically conservative way.

show abstract

Peerless Science: Peer Review and US Science Policy

Cited by 67 publications

References 0 publications

A contrastive analysis of the main benchmarking tools for research assessment in translation and interpreting: the Spanish approach

A contrastive analysis of the main benchmarking tools for research assessment in translation and interpreting: the Spanish approach

Technological-level evaluation using patent statistics: model and application in mobile communications

Unconceived alternatives and conservatism in science: the impact of professionalization, peer-review, and Big Science

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About