Peer reviewers at many funding agencies and scientific journals are asked to score submissions both on individual criteria and overall. The overall scores should be some kind of aggregate of the criteria scores. Carole Lee identifies this as a potential locus for bias to enter the peer review process, which she calls commensuration bias. Here I view the aggregation of scores through the lens of social choice theory. I argue that in many situations, especially when reviewing grant proposals, it is impossible to avoid commensuration bias
OBJECTIVES To examine whether the gender of applicants and peer reviewers and other factors influ...
Systematic evaluations of publicly funded research sometimes use bibliometrics alone or bibliometric...
This is an accepted manuscript of an article published by SAGE in Journal of Information Science on ...
Peer reviewers at many funding agencies and scientific journals are asked to score submissions both ...
Peer-review is widely used throughout academia, most notably in the publication of journal articles ...
No formal investigations have been conducted into the efficacy or potential influence of reviewer re...
Background Ratings in journal peer review can be affected by sources of bias. The bias variable i...
Background: Decisions about which applications to fund are generally based on the mean scores of a p...
Background: Decisions about which applications to fund are generally based on the mean scores of a p...
Peer review is a gatekeeper, the final arbiter of what is valued in academia, but it has been critic...
Peer review is a gatekeeper, the final arbiter of what is valued in academia, but it has been critic...
Peer review is a gatekeeper, the final arbiter of what is valued in academia, but it has been critic...
This study examines a basic assumption of peer review, namely, the idea that there is a consen- sus ...
OBJECTIVES To examine whether the gender of applicants and peer reviewers and other factors influ...
Systematic evaluations of publicly funded research sometimes use bibliometrics alone or bibliometric...
This is an accepted manuscript of an article published by SAGE in Journal of Information Science on ...
Peer reviewers at many funding agencies and scientific journals are asked to score submissions both ...
Peer-review is widely used throughout academia, most notably in the publication of journal articles ...
No formal investigations have been conducted into the efficacy or potential influence of reviewer re...
Background Ratings in journal peer review can be affected by sources of bias. The bias variable i...
Background: Decisions about which applications to fund are generally based on the mean scores of a p...
Background: Decisions about which applications to fund are generally based on the mean scores of a p...
Peer review is a gatekeeper, the final arbiter of what is valued in academia, but it has been critic...
Peer review is a gatekeeper, the final arbiter of what is valued in academia, but it has been critic...
Peer review is a gatekeeper, the final arbiter of what is valued in academia, but it has been critic...
This study examines a basic assumption of peer review, namely, the idea that there is a consen- sus ...
OBJECTIVES To examine whether the gender of applicants and peer reviewers and other factors influ...
Systematic evaluations of publicly funded research sometimes use bibliometrics alone or bibliometric...
This is an accepted manuscript of an article published by SAGE in Journal of Information Science on ...