Abstract
The Wellcome Trust has been using bibliometrics for the last three years to inform the panel that makes decisions on longer-term research grants in neurosciences. These compare an applicant's publications with those of a handful of scientific peers, and citations to these papers compared with a norm group in the applicant's subfield. This paper reports three surveys, two of panel members and one of applicants, to determine their knowledge and views of bibliometrics and of which indicators were the most useful. More than two-thirds of the respondents were in favour of using bibliometrics. They considered citation scores and journal-impact category rankings as being the most helpful. The panel has now decided to continue using bibliometric indicators but to simplify the analysis to make it more cost-effective.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 47-52 |
| Number of pages | 6 |
| Journal | Educational Research and Evaluation |
| Volume | 8 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Jan 1999 |
Keywords
- peer review process
- bibliometrics
- research grants