Overviews of the literature on the reliability of peer reviews for grant applications – come to similar conclusions as those for journal peer review (e.g., – ): There is on the average a low level of IRR. Cicchetti defines IRR as “the extent to which two or more independent reviews of the same scientific document agree” (p. This results in a lack of inter-rater reliability (IRR). According to Marsh, Jayasinghe, and Bond, one of the most important weaknesses of the peer review process is that the ratings given to the same proposal by different reviewers typically differ. Quality control undertaken by peers in the traditional peer review of proposals for grants is essential in most research funding organizations to establish valid and evidence-based approval decisions by the board of trustees. The legitimacy of the approval procedure at funding agencies for basic research depends strongly on whether the reliability, validity, and fairness of the procedure are guaranteed.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |