Peer review is integral to the evaluation of grant proposals. Reviewer perceptions and characteristics have received limited study, especially their associations with reviewers' evaluations. This mixed methods study analyzed the unstructured comments of 270 experienced peer reviewers after they scored proposals based on mock overall evaluations…

Inter-rater reliability (IRR), which is a prerequisite of high-quality ratings and assessments, may be affected by contextual variables, such as the rater's or ratee's gender, major, or experience. Identification of such heterogeneity sources in IRR is important for the implementation of policies with the potential to decrease measurement error…

The allocation of scientific funding through grant programs is crucial for research advancement. While independent peer panels typically handle evaluations, their decisions can lean on personal preferences that go beyond the stated criteria, leading to inconsistencies and potential biases. Given these concerns, our study employs a novel method,…

Grant peer review is a foundational component of scientific research. In the context of grant review meetings, the review process is a collaborative, socially mediated, locally constructed decision-making task. The current study examines how collaborative discussion affects reviewers' scores of grant proposals, how different review panels score…

Career grants are an important instrument for selecting and stimulating the next generation of leading researchers. Earlier research has mainly focused on the relation between past performance and success. In this study we investigate how the selection process takes place. More specifically, we investigate which quality dimensions (of the…

Peer review is valued in higher education, but also widely criticized in terms of potential biases, particularly gender. We evaluate gender differences in peer reviews of grant applications, extending Bornmann, Mutz, and Daniel's meta-analyses that reported small gender differences in favor of men (d = 0.04), but a substantial heterogeneity in…

The procedural changes identified in analyzing the 1979 Marquette University internal grants competition had the positive effect of improving the reliability of the peer review ratings. Improved reliability results in greater confidence in the peer review process on the part of the applicants and the reviewers. (MLW)

This study evaluated the effect of training on improving the reliability of the peer review process by determining whether or not training made a difference in the variability among reviewers' scores and documentation provided to support the scores. Different levels of training were provided for participants in the peer review process who were…