Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 382

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Advanced bibliometric methods as quantitative core of peer review based evaluation and foresight exercises

van Raan, A. F. J.·1996·Scientometrics
DOI 10.1007/bf02129602
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf02129602

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 22

  1. S. Cole, L. Rubin, J. R. Cole,Peer Review in the National Science Foundation. Washington DC: National Academy of Sciences, 1978 (ISBN: 0-309-02788-8).
  2. ABRC.Peer Review: A Report to the Advisory Board for the Research Councils from the Working Group on Peer Review (‘Boden Report’). London: Advisory Board for the Research Councils (ABRC), 1990.
  3. H.-D. Daniel, An evaluation of the peer review process at Angewandte Chemie,Angew. Chem. Int. (Ed. Engl.) 32 (1993) 234–238. · DOI
  4. A. J. Nederhof, The validity and reliability of evaluation of scholarly performance. In:A. F. J. Van Raan (Ed.),Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology, Amsterdam: Elsevier Science/North-Holland, 1988, p. 193–228 (ISBN: 0-444-70537-6). · DOI
  5. H. F. Moed, R. E. De Bruin, Th. N. Van Leeuwen, New bibliometric tools for the assessment of national research performance: Database description, overview of indicators and first applications,Scientometrics, 33 (1995) 381–422. · DOI · Paper page
  6. H. Moxham, J. Anderson, Peer review: a view from the inside,Science and Technology Policy, (1992) 7–15.
  7. M. Polanyi, The republic of Science, its political and economic theory,Minerva, 1 (1962) 54–73. · DOI · Paper page
  8. D. J. van de Kaa, Picking the winners by consensus: grant-giving practice in the Netherlands,Higher Education, 28 (1994) 59–83. · doi:10.1007/bf01383572
  9. D. Müller-Böling (Ed.),Qualitätssicherung in Hochschulen: Forschung, Lehre, Management (Quality Care in Universities: Research, Teaching, Management). Gütersloh: Verlag Bertelsmann Stiftung, 1955 (ISBN: 3-89204-184-9).
  10. VSNU,Quality Assessment of Research. Netherlands Biology in the Nineties. Utrecht: VSNU, 1994 (ISBN: 90-801015-7-5).
  11. D. F. Horrobin, The philosophical basis of peer review and the suppression of innovation,Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), 263 (1990) 1438–1441. · DOI · Paper page
  12. A. F. J. van Raan, Advanced bibliometric methods to assess research performance and scientific development. Basic principles and recent practical applications,Research Evaluation, 3 (1993) 151–166. · DOI
  13. A. F. J. van Raan, Th. N. van Leeuwen,A Decade of Astronomy Research in the Netherlands. Research Report to the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (Astronomy Division, NWO/ASTRON). Leiden: Centre for Science and Technology Studies, report CWTS-95-01, 1995. A shorter version of this report will be published as a journal paper.
  14. A. J. Nederhof, E. C. M. Noyons, International comparison of departments' research performance in the humanities,Journal of the American Society for Information Science (JASIS), 43 (1992) 249–256. · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-4571(199204)43:3<249::aid-asi7>3.0.co;2-i
  15. T. Braun, W. Glänzel, A. Schubert, Scientometric indicator datafiles. A multidimensional machine readable database for evaluative purposes,Scientometrics, 28 (1993) 137–150. · doi:10.1007/bf02016896
  16. H. F. Moed, J. G. M. van der Velde (1993),Bibliometric profiles of academic chemistry research in the Netherlands. Research report to the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (Chemistry Division, NWO/SON). Leiden: Centre for Science and Technology Studies, report CWTS-93-08, 1993.
  17. H. F. Moed, F. Th. Hesselink. The publication output and impact of academic chemistry research in the Netherlands during the 1980's. Bibliometric analysis and policy implications,Research Policy, to be published, 1996 · DOI
  18. VSNU.Quality Assessment of Research. Pedagogical and Educational Sciences. Past Performance and Future Aspects. Utrecht: VSNU, 1995 (ISBN: 90-5588-020-5).
  19. R. J. W. Tijssen, A. F. J. van Raan, Mapping changes in science and technology: bibliometric co-occurrence analysis of the R&D literature,Evaluation Review, 18 (1994) 98–115. · DOI
  20. E. C. M. Noyons, A. F. J. van Raan,Mapping the development of neural network research. Structuring the dynamics of neural network research and an estimation of German activity. Research report to the German Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (BMBF). Leiden: Centre for Science and Technology Studies, report CWTS-95-06, 1995. A shorter version of this report will be published as a journal paper.
  21. E. C. M. Noyons, M. Luwel, H. F. Moed,The Position of IMEC in the Field of Micro-Electronics. Research report to the Ministry of the Flemish Community, Brussels. Leiden/Brussels: Centre for Science and Technology Studies/Ministry of the Flemish Community, Report D/1996/3241/002, 1995 (ISBN: 90-403-0052-6).
  22. BMFT.Deutscher Delphi-Bericht zur Entwicklung von Wissenschaft und Technik. Bonn: Bundesministerium für Forschung und Technologie (BMFT, now BMBF), 1993 (ISBN: 3-88135-267-8).

Cited by

See all 382

Metadata

Authors
van Raan, A. F. J.
Venue
Scientometrics
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
1996-07
Volume
36
Issue
3
Pages
397-420
ISSN
  • 0138-9130 (ISSN-L)
  • 1588-2861
DOI
10.1007/bf02129602
OpenAlex
W2116209312
Cited by
382
References
0
FWCI
13.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Advanced bibliometric methods as quantitative core of peer review based evaluation and foresight exercises. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/bf02129602
The paper
van Raan, A. F. J. (1996). Advanced bibliometric methods as quantitative core of peer review based evaluation and foresight exercises. Scientometrics. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02129602

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.