Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Information Science
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (7)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bence, V.
Right arrow Articles by Oppenheim, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

The Influence of Peer Review on the Research Assessment Exercise

Valerie Bence

Department of Information Science, Loughborough University, UK

Charles Oppenheim

Department of Information Science, Loughborough University, UK, C.Oppenheim{at}lboro.ac.uk

The use of peer review within both the scholarly communication system and the UK’s Research Assessment Exercise is reviewed. The common denominator is that of peer-reviewed academic journals, since peer review is used by referees to aid publication decisions and by RAE panel members to evaluate a department’s research performance. We propose that since academic research is now subject to peer review at all stages of evaluation, it is becoming an accepted method of rewarding (by funding) research. The growth of electronic publications (both toll-access and open access) provides possibilities for changes to some of the process of peer review and RAE, but the fundamental model of peer review to reduce the number of poor quality publications will remain. The paper concludes that because of the many criticisms of peer review, it is unwise to base funding decisions on second level peer review of articles that have already undergone peer review.

Key Words: scholarly publishing • scholarly communication • peer review • process evaluation • universities • research assessment exercise • research • funding

Journal of Information Science, Vol. 30, No. 4, 347-368 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/0165551504045854
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Journal of Information ScienceHome page
M. Thelwall
Bibliometrics to webometrics
Journal of Information Science, August 1, 2008; 34(4): 605 - 621.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of Information ScienceHome page
S. Macdonald and J. Kam
Aardvark et al.: quality journals and gamesmanship in management studies
Journal of Information Science, December 1, 2007; 33(6): 702 - 717.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Cambridge J EconHome page
F. S. Lee
The Research Assessment Exercise, the state and the dominance of mainstream economics in British universities
Camb. J. Econ., March 1, 2007; 31(2): 309 - 325.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]