NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
Showing all 3 results Save | Export
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Eva Barlösius; Laura Paruschke; Axel Philipps – Research Evaluation, 2023
Peer review has developed over time to become the established procedure for assessing and assuring the scientific quality of research. Nevertheless, the procedure has also been variously criticized as conservative, biased, and unfair, among other things. Do scientists regard all these flaws as equally problematic? Do they have the same opinions on…
Descriptors: Peer Evaluation, Grantsmanship, Research Projects, Grants
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Baimpos, Theodoros; Dittel, Nils; Borissov, Roumen – Research Evaluation, 2020
In this study, we analyze the two-phase bottom-up procedure applied by the Future and Emerging Technologies Program (FET-Open) at the Research Executive Agency (REA) of the European Commission (EC), for the evaluation of highly interdisciplinary, multi-beneficiary research proposals which request funding. In the first phase, remote experts assess…
Descriptors: Peer Evaluation, Research Proposals, Interdisciplinary Approach, Financial Support
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
Solans-Domènech, Maite; Guillamón, Imma; Ribera, Aida; Ferreira-González, Ignacio; Carrion, Carme; Permanyer-Miralda, Gaietà; Pons, Joan M. V. – Research Evaluation, 2017
To blind or not researcher's identity has often been a topic of debate in the context of peer-review process for scientific publication and research grant application. This article reports on how knowing the name and experience of researchers/institutions influences the qualification of a proposal. We present our experience of managing the…
Descriptors: Biomedicine, Medical Research, Grantsmanship, Grants