Cargando…
On the correlation between bibliometric indicators and peer review: reply to Opthof and Leydesdorff
Opthof and Leydesdorff (Scientometrics, 2011) reanalyze data reported by Van Raan (Scientometrics 67(3):491–502, 2006) and conclude that there is no significant correlation between on the one hand average citation scores measured using the CPP/FCSm indicator and on the other hand the quality judgmen...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Netherlands
2011
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3153659/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21949454 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0425-7 |
Sumario: | Opthof and Leydesdorff (Scientometrics, 2011) reanalyze data reported by Van Raan (Scientometrics 67(3):491–502, 2006) and conclude that there is no significant correlation between on the one hand average citation scores measured using the CPP/FCSm indicator and on the other hand the quality judgment of peers. We point out that Opthof and Leydesdorff draw their conclusions based on a very limited amount of data. We also criticize the statistical methodology used by Opthof and Leydesdorff. Using a larger amount of data and a more appropriate statistical methodology, we do find a significant correlation between the CPP/FCSm indicator and peer judgment. |
---|