scholarly journals Peer review versus the h-index for evaluation of individual researchers in the biological sciences

2020 ◽  
Vol 116 (9/10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven D. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Biological Sciences ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Research Performance ◽  
Past Performance ◽  
H Index ◽  
Plant Sciences ◽  
Structured System ◽  
Rating Category ◽  
Bibliometric Measures

Past performance is a key consideration when rationalising the allocation of grants and other opportunities to individual researchers. The National Research Foundation of South Africa (NRF) has long used a highly structured system of ‘rating’ the past performance of individual researchers. This system relies heavily on peer review, and has seldom been benchmarked against bibliometric measures of research performance such as Hirsch’s h-index. Here I use data for about 600 rated researchers in the biological sciences to evaluate the extent to which outcomes of peer review correspond to bibliometric measures of research performance. The analysis revealed that values of the h-index based on the Scopus database are typically 5–20 for researchers placed in the NRF’s C rating category (‘established’), 20–40 for those in the B rating category (‘considerable international recognition’) and >40 for those in the A rating category (‘leading international scholars’). Despite concerns that citation patterns differ among disciplines, the mean h-index per rating category was remarkably consistent across five different disciplines in the biological sciences, namely animal sciences, plant sciences, ecology, microbiology and biochemistry/genetics. This observation suggests that the NRF rating system is equitable in the sense that the outcomes of peer review are generally consistent with bibliometric measures of research performance across different disciplines in the biological sciences. However, the study did reveal some notable discrepancies which could reflect either bias in the peer-review process or shortcomings in the bibliometric measures, or both.

scholarly journals From the Editor in Chief

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. vii-viii
Author(s):  
Ahmet Doğanay
Keyword(s):  
Data Analysis ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Good News ◽  
High Rate ◽  
H Index ◽  
Critical Problems ◽  
Educational Sciences

Dear producers and consumers of knowledge, I would like to share the happiness of being with you again with 7th Volume 3th Issue of Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction (PEGEGOG). I hope you could find time to have a rest after your busy schedule. Initially, I want to thank you for the increasing interest for our journal. We shared with you in previous issues and announcements that our journal got high scores by many indexes. I'm pleased to inform you in this issue that the journal's h-index rose to 10. However, our aim is always to have much higher scores. Therefore, we invite you to share studies comprehensive, built on strong theoretical basis, innovative and bringing a vision on various fields of educational sciences increasing the number of readers. There has been 54 articles sent for publication to our journal. This is good news for our journal and country. On the other hand, I have to indicate that there were critical problems in terms of format within these articles as stated in the previous issue. First of all, unfortunately we had to reject some articles as in many of them there were texts very similar to ones in different articles. At first step, we scan all articles in i-Thenticate program to determine the exact quotations from other resources. After this scan, we reject the articles detected to have exact quotations at a high rate without initiating peer-review process. Apart from that, we also send back the articles not written in an academic format not to disturb our reviewers unnecessarily. One of the problems with the articles submitted to our journal and we had to reject was about data analysis. The data is the raw information collected from related resources through research aims. These should be analyzed in parallel with these aims. It is necessary to analyze them using statistics for quantitative data and methods such as content analysis or descriptive analysis for qualitative data. Analysis provides the data being transformed into findings and make sense. Especially, in some of document analysis and some qualitative studies, it is seen that data are presented as findings. In some others, data are presented being only described. It is essential that the studies are formed in an article format obeying the rules by the journal and presented for publication afterwards. As always, we present the six articles got through peer-review process and given DOI number to you dear producers and consumers of knowledge. I wish these studies conducted in various fields of educational sciences will be useful and contribute to theoretical knowledge within the field. Hope to meet within the next issue. Sincerely yours,  

scholarly journals From the Editor in Chief

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. vi-vii
Author(s):  
Ahmet Doğanay
Keyword(s):  
Data Analysis ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Good News ◽  
High Rate ◽  
H Index ◽  
Critical Problems ◽  
Busy Schedule

Dear producers and consumers of knowledge, I would like to share the happiness of being with you again with 8th Volume 2nd Issue of Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction (PEGEGOG). I hope you could find time to have a rest after your busy schedule. Initially, I want to thank you for the increasing interest for our journal. There has been 51 articles sent for publication to our journal. I'm pleased to inform you in this issue that the journal's h-index rose to 16. This is good news for our journal and country. On the other hand, I have to indicate that there were critical problems in terms of format within these articles as stated in the previous issue. First of all, unfortunately we had to reject some articles as in many of them there were texts very similar to ones in different articles. At first step, we scan all articles in i-Thenticate program to determine the exact quotations from other resources. After this scan, we reject the articles detected to have exact quotations at a high rate without initiating peer-review process. Apart from that, we also send back the articles not written in an academic format not to disturb our reviewers unnecessarily. One of the problems with the articles submitted to our journal and we had to reject was about data analysis. The data is the raw information collected from related resources through research aims. These should be analyzed in parallel with these aims. It is necessary to analyze them using statistics for quantitative data and methods such as content analysis or descriptive analysis for qualitative data. Analysis provides the data being transformed into findings and make sense. Especially, in some of document analysis and some qualitative studies, it is seen that data are presented as findings. In some others, data are presented being only described. It is essential that the studies are formed in an article format obeying the rules by the journal and presented for publication afterwards. As always, we present the six articles got through peer-review process and given DOI number to you dear producers and consumers of knowledge. I wish these studies conducted in various fields of educational sciences will be useful and contribute to theoretical knowledge within the field. Hope to meet within the next issue. Sincerely yours,

scholarly journals From the Editor in Chief

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. vii-viii
Author(s):  
Ahmet Doğanay
Keyword(s):  
Data Analysis ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Good News ◽  
High Rate ◽  
H Index ◽  
Critical Problems ◽  
Busy Schedule

Dear producers and consumers of knowledge, I would like to share the happiness of being with you again with 8th Volume 4th last issue of Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction (PEGEGOG) in 2018. I hope you could find time to have a rest after your busy schedule. Initially, I want to thank you for the increasing interest for our journal. There has been 54 articles sent for publication to our journal. I'm pleased to inform you in this issue that the journal's h-index rose to 16. This is good news for our journal and country. On the other hand, I have to indicate that there were critical problems in terms of format within these articles as stated in the previous issue. First of all, unfortunately we had to reject some articles as in many of them there were texts very similar to ones in different articles. At first step, we scan all articles in i-Thenticate program to determine the exact quotations from other resources. After this scan, we reject the articles detected to have exact quotations at a high rate without initiating peer-review process. Apart from that, we also send back the articles not written in an academic format not to disturb our reviewers unnecessarily. One of the problems with the articles submitted to our journal and we had to reject was about data analysis. The data is the raw information collected from related resources through research aims. These should be analyzed in parallel with these aims. It is necessary to analyze them using statistics for quantitative data and methods such as content analysis or descriptive analysis for qualitative data. Analysis provides the data being transformed into findings and make sense. Especially, in some of document analysis and some qualitative studies, it is seen that data are presented as findings. In some others, data are presented being only described. It is essential that the studies are formed in an article format obeying the rules by the journal and presented for publication afterwards. As always, we present the six articles got through peer-review process and given DOI number to you dear producers and consumers of knowledge. I wish these studies conducted in various fields of educational sciences will be useful and contribute to theoretical knowledge within the field. Hope to meet within the next issue. Sincerely yours,

scholarly journals From the Editor in Chief

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. vii
Author(s):  
Ahmet Doğanay
Keyword(s):  
Data Analysis ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Good News ◽  
High Rate ◽  
H Index ◽  
Critical Problems ◽  
Educational Sciences

Dear producers and consumers of knowledge,   I would like to share the happiness of being with you again with 7th Volume 2nd Issue of Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction (PEGEGOG). I hope you could find time to have a rest after your busAy schedule. Initially, I want to thank you for the increasing interest for our journal.   As mentioned before, we had applied to many indexes Our efforts have started to yield fruitful results. Thanks to the valuable contributions of our authors and readers, I am happy to announce that Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction is now being indexed in  Emerging Sources Citation Index (E-SCI) effective from 2017. I am hoping to give the announcements of other indexing news for the next issues.   We shared with you in previous issues and announcements that our journal got high scores by many indexes. I'm pleased to inform you in this issue that the journal's h-index rose to 9. However, our aim is always to have much higher scores. Therefore, we invite you to share studies comprehensive, built on strong theoretical basis, innovative and bringing a vision on various fields of educational sciences increasing the number of readers.   There has been 43 articles sent for publication to our journal. This is good news for our journal and country. On the other hand, I have to indicate that there were critical problems in terms of format within these articles as stated in the previous issue. First of all, unfortunately we had to reject some articles as in many of them there were texts very similar to ones in different articles. At first step, we scan all articles in i-Thenticate program to determine the exact quotations from other resources. After this scan, we reject the articles detected to have exact quotations at a high rate without initiating peer-review process. Apart from that, we also send back the articles not written in an academic format not to disturb our reviewers unnecessarily.   One of the problems with the articles submitted to our journal and we had to reject was about data analysis. The data is the raw information collected from related resources through research aims. These should be analyzed in parallel with these aims. It is necessary to analyze them using statistics for quantitative data and methods such as content analysis or descriptive analysis for qualitative data. Analysis provides the data being transformed into findings and make sense. Especially, in some of document analysis and some qualitative studies, it is seen that data are presented as findings. In some others, data are presented being only described. It is essential that the studies are formed in an article format obeying the rules by the journal and presented for publication afterwards.   As always, we present the six articles got through peer-review process and given DOI number to you dear producers and consumers of knowledge. I wish these studies conducted in various fields of educational sciences will be useful and contribute to theoretical knowledge within the field. Hope to meet within the next issue.   Sincerely yours,  

scholarly journals From the Editor in Chief

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. vii-viii
Author(s):  
Ahmet Doğanay
Keyword(s):  
Data Analysis ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Good News ◽  
High Rate ◽  
H Index ◽  
Critical Problems ◽  
Busy Schedule

Dear producers and consumers of knowledge, I would like to share the happiness of being with you again with 8th Volume 3th Issue of Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction (PEGEGOG). I hope you could find time to have a rest after your busy schedule. Initially, I want to thank you for the increasing interest for our journal. There has been 65 articles sent for publication to our journal. I'm pleased to inform you in this issue that the journal's h-index rose to 16. This is good news for our journal and country. On the other hand, I have to indicate that there were critical problems in terms of format within these articles as stated in the previous issue. First of all, unfortunately we had to reject some articles as in many of them there were texts very similar to ones in different articles. At first step, we scan all articles in i-Thenticate program to determine the exact quotations from other resources. After this scan, we reject the articles detected to have exact quotations at a high rate without initiating peer-review process. Apart from that, we also send back the articles not written in an academic format not to disturb our reviewers unnecessarily. One of the problems with the articles submitted to our journal and we had to reject was about data analysis. The data is the raw information collected from related resources through research aims. These should be analyzed in parallel with these aims. It is necessary to analyze them using statistics for quantitative data and methods such as content analysis or descriptive analysis for qualitative data. Analysis provides the data being transformed into findings and make sense. Especially, in some of document analysis and some qualitative studies, it is seen that data are presented as findings. In some others, data are presented being only described. It is essential that the studies are formed in an article format obeying the rules by the journal and presented for publication afterwards. As always, we present the six articles got through peer-review process and given DOI number to you dear producers and consumers of knowledge. I wish these studies conducted in various fields of educational sciences will be useful and contribute to theoretical knowledge within the field. Hope to meet within the next issue. Sincerely yours,

scholarly journals From the Editor in Chief

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. vii
Author(s):  
Ahmet Doğanay
Keyword(s):  
Data Analysis ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Good News ◽  
High Rate ◽  
H Index ◽  
Critical Problems ◽  
Educational Sciences

Dear producers and consumers of knowledge, I would like to share the happiness of being with you again with 7th Volume 4th Issue of Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction (PEGEGOG). I hope you could find time to have a rest after your busy schedule. Initially, I want to thank you for the increasing interest for our journal. PEGEGOG has been indexed in SCOPUS since July 17, 2017. I'm pleased to inform you in this issue that the journal's h-index rose to 11. However, our aim is always to have much higher scores. Therefore, we invite you to share studies comprehensive, built on strong theoretical basis, innovative and bringing a vision on various fields of educational sciences increasing the number of readers. There has been 48 articles sent for publication to our journal. This is good news for our journal and country. On the other hand, I have to indicate that there were critical problems in terms of format within these articles as stated in the previous issue. First of all, unfortunately we had to reject some articles as in many of them there were texts very similar to ones in different articles. At first step, we scan all articles in i-Thenticate program to determine the exact quotations from other resources. After this scan, we reject the articles detected to have exact quotations at a high rate without initiating peer-review process. Apart from that, we also send back the articles not written in an academic format not to disturb our reviewers unnecessarily. One of the problems with the articles submitted to our journal and we had to reject was about data analysis. The data is the raw information collected from related resources through research aims. These should be analyzed in parallel with these aims. It is necessary to analyze them using statistics for quantitative data and methods such as content analysis or descriptive analysis for qualitative data. Analysis provides the data being transformed into findings and make sense. Especially, in some of document analysis and some qualitative studies, it is seen that data are presented as findings. In some others, data are presented being only described. It is essential that the studies are formed in an article format obeying the rules by the journal and presented for publication afterwards. As always, we present the six articles got through peer-review process and given DOI number to you dear producers and consumers of knowledge. I wish these studies conducted in various fields of educational sciences will be useful and contribute to theoretical knowledge within the field. Hope to meet within the next issue. Sincerely yours,

Getting Involved in the Peer Review Process

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenya Malcolm ◽  
Allison Groenendyk ◽  
Mary Cwik ◽  
Alisa Beyer
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document