A Kuhnian Critique of Psychometric Research on Peer Review
A Kuhnian Critique of Psychometric Research on Peer Review
复制标题
库恩式对同行评审心理测量研究的批判
DOI：
10.1086/667841
复制
发表时间：
2012
影响因子：
1.7
通讯作者：
Carole J. Lee
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Carole J. Lee
以心理测量学为导向的研究人员将专家同行评议的低互信度测量解释为对同行评议实践的谴责。我认为，这种观点忽略了审稿人之间不同形式的规范性适当分歧。特别有趣的是Kuhnian的问题，即审稿人评分的差异在多大程度上可以通过规范上适当的分歧来解释，即在正常科学时期如何解释和应用学科内的评估标准。在这些经验和哲学的分析完成之前，它仍然是不清楚的，在多大程度上，低的相互可靠性度量代表了审稿人之间的合理分歧，而不是任意的差异。
Psychometrically oriented researchers construe low interrater reliability measures for expert peer reviewers as damning for the practice of peer review. I argue that this perspective overlooks different forms of normatively appropriate disagreement among reviewers. Of special interest are Kuhnian questions about the extent to which variance in reviewer ratings can be accounted for by normatively appropriate disagreements about how to interpret and apply evaluative criteria within disciplines during times of normal science. Until these empirical-cum-philosophical analyses are done, it will remain unclear the extent to which low interrater reliability measures represent reasonable disagreement rather than arbitrary differences between reviewers.
影响因子：
120.7
作者：
Justice, AC;Cho, MK;Rennie, D
通讯作者：
Rennie, D