IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v45y2016i9p1936-1938.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improving the Peer review process: Capturing more information and enabling high-risk/high-return research

Author

Listed:
  • Linton, Jonathan D.

Abstract

The Black-Scholes model and the peer-review process are combined to offer more insight into the apparent value of research projects. In doing so high-risk/high-return research is found to be more attractive and financially rational than under the traditional peer review approach. In other words projects with the highest disagreement amongst panel members should sometimes be selected even though the average panel score may not be the highest under consideration. This finding is important as it improves the existing peer review process by utilizing not only the mean value of peer reviews, but also their standard deviation. This note also opens the consideration of the potential of Real Options approaches for decision support for project selection and management of research.

Suggested Citation

  • Linton, Jonathan D., 2016. "Improving the Peer review process: Capturing more information and enabling high-risk/high-return research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1936-1938.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:45:y:2016:i:9:p:1936-1938
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2016.07.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733316301111
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2016.07.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rüdiger Mutz & Lutz Bornmann & Hans-Dieter Daniel, 2015. "Testing for the fairness and predictive validity of research funding decisions: A multilevel multiple imputation for missing data approach using ex-ante and ex-post peer evaluation data from the Austr," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(11), pages 2321-2339, November.
    2. J Britt Holbrook & Robert Frodeman, 2011. "Peer review and the ex ante assessment of societal impacts," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(3), pages 239-246, September.
    3. Upali W. Jayasinghe & Herbert W. Marsh & Nigel Bond, 2003. "A multilevel cross‐classified modelling approach to peer review of grant proposals: the effects of assessor and researcher attributes on assessor ratings," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 166(3), pages 279-300, October.
    4. Bornmann, Lutz & Daniel, Hans-Dieter, 2007. "Gatekeepers of science—Effects of external reviewers’ attributes on the assessments of fellowship applications," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 83-91.
    5. Bornmann, Lutz & Mutz, Rüdiger & Daniel, Hans-Dieter, 2008. "Latent Markov modeling applied to grant peer review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 217-228.
    6. Black, Fischer & Scholes, Myron S, 1973. "The Pricing of Options and Corporate Liabilities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 81(3), pages 637-654, May-June.
    7. Wade D. Cook & Boaz Golany & Moshe Kress & Michal Penn & Tal Raviv, 2005. "Optimal Allocation of Proposals to Reviewers to Facilitate Effective Ranking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(4), pages 655-661, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chiara Franzoni & Paula Stephan & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2022. "Funding Risky Research," Entrepreneurship and Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(1), pages 103-133.
    2. Elise S. Brezis & Aliaksandr Birukou, 2020. "Arbitrariness in the peer review process," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(1), pages 393-411, April.
    3. Thomas Feliciani & Junwen Luo & Lai Ma & Pablo Lucas & Flaminio Squazzoni & Ana Marušić & Kalpana Shankar, 2019. "A scoping review of simulation models of peer review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 555-594, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Thomas Feliciani & Junwen Luo & Lai Ma & Pablo Lucas & Flaminio Squazzoni & Ana Marušić & Kalpana Shankar, 2019. "A scoping review of simulation models of peer review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 555-594, October.
    2. Carole J. Lee & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Guo Zhang & Blaise Cronin, 2013. "Bias in peer review," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(1), pages 2-17, January.
    3. Bornmann, Lutz & Mutz, Rüdiger & Daniel, Hans-Dieter, 2008. "Latent Markov modeling applied to grant peer review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 217-228.
    4. Bornmann, Lutz & Mutz, Rüdiger & Daniel, Hans-Dieter, 2008. "How to detect indications of potential sources of bias in peer review: A generalized latent variable modeling approach exemplified by a gender study," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 280-287.
    5. Ben Abdallah, Skander & Lasserre, Pierre, 2016. "Asset retirement with infinitely repeated alternative replacements: Harvest age and species choice in forestry," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 144-164.
    6. Kau, James B. & Keenan, Donald C., 1999. "Patterns of rational default," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 765-785, November.
    7. Carol Alexandra & Leonardo M. Nogueira, 2005. "Optimal Hedging and Scale Inavriance: A Taxonomy of Option Pricing Models," ICMA Centre Discussion Papers in Finance icma-dp2005-10, Henley Business School, University of Reading, revised Nov 2005.
    8. William R. Morgan, 2023. "Finance Must Be Defended: Cybernetics, Neoliberalism and Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-21, February.
    9. Filipe Fontanela & Antoine Jacquier & Mugad Oumgari, 2019. "A Quantum algorithm for linear PDEs arising in Finance," Papers 1912.02753, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2021.
    10. Weihan Li & Jin E. Zhang & Xinfeng Ruan & Pakorn Aschakulporn, 2024. "An empirical study on the early exercise premium of American options: Evidence from OEX and XEO options," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 44(7), pages 1117-1153, July.
    11. Jun, Doobae & Ku, Hyejin, 2015. "Static hedging of chained-type barrier options," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 317-327.
    12. Thomas Kokholm & Martin Stisen, 2015. "Joint pricing of VIX and SPX options with stochastic volatility and jump models," Journal of Risk Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 16(1), pages 27-48, January.
    13. Gordian Rättich & Kim Clark & Evi Hartmann, 2011. "Performance measurement and antecedents of early internationalizing firms: A systematic assessment," Working Papers 0031, College of Business, University of Texas at San Antonio.
    14. Paul Ormerod, 2010. "La crisis actual y la culpabilidad de la teoría macroeconómica," Revista de Economía Institucional, Universidad Externado de Colombia - Facultad de Economía, vol. 12(22), pages 111-128, January-J.
    15. An Chen & Thai Nguyen & Thorsten Sehner, 2022. "Unit-Linked Tontine: Utility-Based Design, Pricing and Performance," Risks, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-27, April.
    16. Kearney, Fearghal & Shang, Han Lin & Sheenan, Lisa, 2019. "Implied volatility surface predictability: The case of commodity markets," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    17. Álvarez Echeverría Francisco & López Sarabia Pablo & Venegas Martínez Francisco, 2012. "Valuación financiera de proyectos de inversión en nuevas tecnologías con opciones reales," Contaduría y Administración, Accounting and Management, vol. 57(3), pages 115-145, julio-sep.
    18. Vorst, A. C. F., 1988. "Option Pricing And Stochastic Processes," Econometric Institute Archives 272366, Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    19. Dybvig, Philip H. & Gong, Ning & Schwartz, Rachel, 2000. "Bias of Damage Awards and Free Options in Securities Litigation," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 149-168, April.
    20. Zhao, Zhibiao & Wu, Wei Biao, 2009. "Nonparametric inference of discretely sampled stable Lévy processes," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 153(1), pages 83-92, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:45:y:2016:i:9:p:1936-1938. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.