BIOL 210 Lecture Notes - Lecture 12: Impact Factor, Odds Ratio, Georges Pouchet
25 Jan 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
Document Summary
Some people: will claim it"s an innate difference. Wenneras and wold study: nepotism and sexism in peer-review. **is a 1997 study (one of the founding papers)*: has very high citation rates, google scholar: 1215 citations, web of science: 395 citations, great results/great methodology. If you"re given a score by panel members on your quality, how can you compare this to anything other than the score: cannot evaluate. Is the applicant affiliated with any of the people on the committee: have to retire if you know the researcher, the main variable you expect to be affected by the score: actual productivity. Should give you a 3. 8 out of 4. 0 if you have a huge total impact score/citation frequencies. Statistical significance of the effects is really strong not a false positive: the quality of the study is what is convincing. Science may be biased, but we can study biases in science via science: need to understand what a meta-analysis graph looks like:
