We thank Daniel S. Hamermesh and five referees for very useful comments. Support from the ESRC, through the CAGE Centre, is gratefully acknowledged.
Feature or Conference Issue
How Should Peer-review Panels Behave?*
Article first published online: 2 SEP 2013
© 2013 The Author(s). The Economic Journal © 2013 Royal Economic Society
The Economic Journal
Volume 123, Issue 570, pages F255–F278, August 2013
How to Cite
Sgroi, D. and Oswald, A. J. (2013), How Should Peer-review Panels Behave?. The Economic Journal, 123: F255–F278. doi: 10.1111/ecoj.12070
- Issue published online: 2 SEP 2013
- Article first published online: 2 SEP 2013
- Accepted manuscript online: 1 JUL 2013 08:33AM EST
Many governments wish to assess the quality of their universities. A prominent example is the UK's new Research Excellence Framework (REF) 2014. In the REF, peer-review panels will be provided with information on publications and citations. This article suggests a way in which panels could choose the weights to attach to these two indicators. The analysis draws in an intuitive way on the concept of Bayesian updating (where citations gradually reveal information about the initially imperfectly observed importance of the research). Our study should not be interpreted as the argument that only mechanistic measures ought to be used in a REF.