Physics – Physics and Society
Scientific paper
2010-06-19
Research Evaluation 20 (2011) 107-116
Physics
Physics and Society
5 figures, each with 2 panels. To appear in the journal Research Evaluation
Scientific paper
10.3152/095820211X12941371876625
Peer-evaluation based measures of group research quality such as the UK's Research Assessment Exercise (RAE), which do not employ bibliometric analyses, cannot directly avail of such methods to normalize research impact across disciplines. This is seen as a conspicuous flaw of such exercises and calls have been made to find a remedy. Here a simple, systematic solution is proposed based upon a mathematical model for the relationship between research quality and group quantity. This model manifests both the Matthew effect and a phenomenon akin to the Ringelmann effect and reveals the existence of two critical masses for each academic discipline: a lower value, below which groups are vulnerable, and an upper value beyond which the dependency of quality on quantity reduces and plateaus appear when the critical masses are large. A possible normalization procedure is then to pitch these plateaus at similar levels. We examine the consequences of this procedure at RAE for a multitude of academic disciplines, corresponding to a range of critical masses.
Berche Bertrand
Kenna Ralph
No associations
LandOfFree
Normalization of peer-evaluation measures of group research quality across academic disciplines does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this scientific paper.
If you have personal experience with Normalization of peer-evaluation measures of group research quality across academic disciplines, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Normalization of peer-evaluation measures of group research quality across academic disciplines will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFWR-SCP-O-431584