Convergent validation of peer review decisions using the h index: Extent of and reasons for type I and type II errors

摘要: Hirsch [Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy Sciences United States America, 102(46), 16569–16572] has proposed h as a single-number criterion evaluate output researcher. We investigated convergent validity decisions for awarding long-term fellowships post-doctoral researchers practiced by Boehringer Ingelheim Fonds (B.I.F.) using index. Our study examined 414 B.I.F. applicants (64 approved and 350 rejected) with total 1586 papers. The results our show that applicants’ indices correlate substantially standard bibliometric indicators. Even though on average (arithmetic mean median) are higher than those rejected (and this, fundamentally confirm funding decisions), distributions in part overlaps we categorized type I error (falsely drawn approval) or II rejection). Approximately, one-third award fellowship applicant error, about not error. analyses possible reasons these errors applicant's field but personal ties between can increase decrease risks errors.