Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLamont, Michele
dc.contributor.authorMallard, Gregoire
dc.contributor.authorGuetzkow, Joshua
dc.date.accessioned2009-03-08T21:12:52Z
dc.date.issued2006
dc.identifier.citationLamont, Michèle, Grégoire Mallard, and Joshua Guetzkow. 2006. Beyond blind faith: overcoming the obstacles to interdisciplinary evaluation. Research Evaluation 15(1): 43-55.en
dc.identifier.issn1471-5449en
dc.identifier.issn0958-2029en
dc.identifier.urihttp://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:2643648
dc.description.abstractThis paper examines how panelists serving on interdisciplinary funding panels produce evaluations they perceive as fair, drawing on 81 interviews with panelists serving on multidisciplinary fellowship competitions. We identify how peer reviewers define “good” interdisciplinary proposals and the rules they follow: respect for disciplinary sovereignty, deference to expertise and methodological pluralism. These rules ensure the preponderance of the voices of experts over non-experts. Panelists also adopt strategies to make other reviewers who lack expertise trust that their judgments are disinterested and unbiased, while reviewers who lack expertise are not afraid to make decisions based on idiosyncratic tastes rather than substantive quality.en
dc.description.sponsorshipSociologyen
dc.language.isoen_USen
dc.publisherBeech Tree Publishingen
dc.relation.isversionofhttp://dx.doi.org/10.3152/147154406781776002en
dash.licenseLAA
dc.titleBeyond blind faith: overcoming the obstacles to interdisciplinary evaluationen
dc.relation.journalResearch Evaluationen
dash.depositing.authorLamont, Michele
dc.identifier.doi10.3152/147154406781776002*
dash.contributor.affiliatedLamont, Michele


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record