Abstract
Quality judgments of predominantly local senior scientists regarding the scientific performance of candidates for a doctorate degree in physics were compared to the non-local short-term and long-term impact of the work published by these candidates before and after graduation. It was hypothesized that publications of cum laude degree-holders (‘cumlaudes’), both shortly before and shortly after the award of the degree, would be higher cited both on the short and long run than publications of ‘ordinary’ degree-holders. Before graduation, cumlaudes were significantly more productive, as well as authors of more highly cited publications than ordinary doctorates. Publications authored by cumlaudes some years before their graduation received on the average more than twice as many citations as publications authored by non-cumlaudes. However, in particular for cumlaudes, productivity and impact decreased sharply in years after graduation. After graduation, cumlaudes continued to be more productive than non-cumlaudes, but the impact of their publications equalled those produced by non-cumlaudes. The results offer little evidence for the Matthew effect and the Ortega hypothesis, but support the validity of both peer review outcomes and bibliometric impact assessments of scientific performance.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
S. COLE, L. RUBIN, J. R. COLE, Peer review and the support of science,Scientific American, 237 (1977) 34; J. R. COLE, S. COLE, Which researcher will get the grant?Nature, 279 (1979) 575; S. COLE, J. R. COLE, G. A. SIMON, Chance and consensus in peer review,Science, 214 (1981) 881.
F. NARIN,Evaluative Bibliometrics. The Use of Publication and Citation Analysis in the Evaluation of Scientific Activity, National Science Foundation, 1976.
J. IRVINE, B. R. MARTIN, Evaluating big science: CERN's past performance and future prospects,Scientometrics, 7 (1985) 281.
H. F. MOED, W. J. M. BURGER, J. G. FRANKFORT, A. F. J. VAN RAAN,On the Measurement of Research Performance. The Use of Bibliometric Indicators, Research Policy Unit, Leiden, 1983. Monograph: 200 pp. ISBN 90-9000552-8.
H. F. MOED, W. J. M. BURGER, J. G. FRANKFORT, A. F. J. VAN RAAN, The use of bibliometric data for the measurement of university research performance,Research Policy, 14 (1985) 131.
H. F. MOED, W. J. M. BURGER, J. G. FRANKFORT, A. F. J. VAN RAAN, A comparative study of bibliometric past performance analysis and peer judgement,Scientometrics, 8 (1985) 149.
A. J. NEDERHOF, Evaluating research output through life work citation counts,Scientometrics, 7 (1985) 23.
R. K. MERTON, The Matthew effect in science,Science, 159 (1968) 56.
J. ORTEGA Y GASSET,The revolution of the masses, New York, Norton, 1932.
W. E. SNIZEK, A re-examination of the Ortega hypothesis: The Dutch case,Scientometrics, 9 (1986) 3.
M. H. MACROBERTS, B. R. MACROBERTS, Quantitative measures of communication in science: A study of the formal level,Social Studies of Science, 16 (1986) 151.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nederhof, A.J., Van Raan, A.F.J. Peer review and bibliometric indicators of scientific performance: A comparison of cum laude doctorates with ordinary doctorates in physics. Scientometrics 11, 333–350 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02279353
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02279353