Grants Peer Review in Theory and Practice
- 1 February 1994
- journal article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Evaluation Review
- Vol. 18 (1) , 20-30
- https://doi.org/10.1177/0193841x9401800103
Abstract
Grants peer review is a family of ex ante methods used by federal agencies to select research proposalsforfunding. This article draws on Chubin and Hackett's 1990 book, Peerless Science: Peer Review and U.S. Science Policy, to examine both the assumptions and theory underlying peer review as an evaluation methodology and the issues that arise in the operation of peer-based systems at the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The article discusses criticisms of peer review, the various criteria that agencies must balance in interpreting evaluations of expert peers, and outstanding issues to be addressed in the refinement and reform of peer review systems. The article concludes with suggestions on how to redress the shortcomings of peer review in decision making, especially the allocation of scarce public monies.Keywords
This publication has 7 references indexed in Scilit:
- When Does Intellectual Passion Become Conflict of Interest?Science, 1992
- Revamping Peer ReviewScience News, 1990
- Commentary: On the Virtues of Self-StudyScience, Technology, & Human Values, 1989
- Citations and scientific progress: Comparing bibliometric measures with scientist judgmentsScientometrics, 1988
- Scientific Progress: An Interim ReportBioScience, 1986
- Journal Peer Review and Public PolicyScience, Technology, & Human Values, 1985
- Chance and Consensus in Peer ReviewScience, 1981