On the correlation between bibliometric indicators and peer review: reply to Opthof and Leydesdorff

  • Authors:

  • Ludo Waltman;Nees Jan Eck;Thed N. Leeuwen;Martijn S. Visser;Anthony F. Raan

  • Affiliations:

  • Centre for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands;Centre for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands;Centre for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands;Centre for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands;Centre for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands

  • Venue:
  • Scientometrics
  • Year:
  • 2011

Quantified Score

Hi-index 0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Opthof and Leydesdorff (Scientometrics, 2011) reanalyze data reported by Van Raan (Scientometrics 67(3):491---502, 2006) and conclude that there is no significant correlation between on the one hand average citation scores measured using the CPP/FCSm indicator and on the other hand the quality judgment of peers. We point out that Opthof and Leydesdorff draw their conclusions based on a very limited amount of data. We also criticize the statistical methodology used by Opthof and Leydesdorff. Using a larger amount of data and a more appropriate statistical methodology, we do find a significant correlation between the CPP/FCSm indicator and peer judgment.