Heterogeneity of Inter-Rater Reliabilities of Grant Peer Reviews and Its Determinants: A General Estimating Equations Approach

Verfasser / Beitragende:
[Rüdiger Mutz, Lutz Bornmann, Hans-Dieter Daniel]
Ort, Verlag, Jahr:
2012
Enthalten in:
PLoS ONE, 7 (10), p. e48509
Format:
Artikel (online)
ID: 528784412
LEADER naa a22 4500
001 528784412
005 20180924065517.0
007 cr unu---uuuuu
008 180924e20121031xx s 000 0 eng
024 7 0 |a 10.3929/ethz-b-000059384  |2 doi 
024 7 0 |a 10.1371/journal.pone.0048509  |2 doi 
035 |a (ETHRESEARCH)oai:www.research-collecti.ethz.ch:20.500.11850/59384 
100 1 |a Mutz  |D Rüdiger 
245 1 0 |a Heterogeneity of Inter-Rater Reliabilities of Grant Peer Reviews and Its Determinants: A General Estimating Equations Approach  |h [Elektronische Daten]  |c [Rüdiger Mutz, Lutz Bornmann, Hans-Dieter Daniel] 
246 0 |a PLoS ONE 
506 |a Open access  |2 ethresearch 
520 3 |a Background One of the most important weaknesses of the peer review process is that different reviewers' ratings of the same grant proposal typically differ. Studies on the inter-rater reliability of peer reviews mostly report only average values across all submitted proposals. But inter-rater reliabilities can vary depending on the scientific discipline or the requested grant sum, for instance. Goal Taking the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) as an example, we aimed to investigate empirically the heterogeneity of inter-rater reliabilities (intraclass correlation) and its determinants. Methods The data consisted of N = 8,329 proposals with N = 23,414 overall ratings by reviewers, which were statistically analyzed using the generalized estimating equations approach (GEE). Results We found an overall intraclass correlation (ICC) of reviewer? ratings of ρ = .259 with a 95% confidence interval of [.249,.279]. In humanities the ICCs were statistically significantly higher than in all other research areas except technical sciences. The ICC in biosciences deviated statistically significantly from the average ICC. Other factors (besides the research areas), such as the grant sum requested, had negligible influence on the ICC. Conclusions Especially in biosciences, the number of reviewers of each proposal should be increased so as to increase the ICC. 
540 |a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported  |u http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0  |2 ethresearch 
700 1 |a Bornmann  |D Lutz  |e joint author 
700 1 |a Daniel  |D Hans-Dieter  |e joint author 
773 0 |t PLoS ONE  |d Lawrence, KS, USA : Public Library of Science  |g 7 (10), p. e48509  |x 1932-6203 
856 4 0 |u http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11850/59384  |q text/html  |z WWW-Backlink auf das Repository (Open access) 
908 |D 1  |a Journal Article  |2 ethresearch 
950 |B ETHRESEARCH  |P 856  |E 40  |u http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11850/59384  |q text/html  |z WWW-Backlink auf das Repository (Open access) 
950 |B ETHRESEARCH  |P 100  |E 1-  |a Mutz  |D Rüdiger 
950 |B ETHRESEARCH  |P 700  |E 1-  |a Bornmann  |D Lutz  |e joint author 
950 |B ETHRESEARCH  |P 700  |E 1-  |a Daniel  |D Hans-Dieter  |e joint author 
950 |B ETHRESEARCH  |P 773  |E 0-  |t PLoS ONE  |d Lawrence, KS, USA : Public Library of Science  |g 7 (10), p. e48509  |x 1932-6203 
898 |a BK010053  |b XK010053  |c XK010000 
949 |B ETHRESEARCH  |F ETHRESEARCH  |b ETHRESEARCH  |j Journal Article  |c Open access