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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Waltman, Ludo, van Eck, Nees Jan, van Leeuwen, Thed N., Visser, Martijn S., van Raan, Anthony F. J.
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
Descripción
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.