National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Implementation of the Peer Review Program
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1997. Peer Review in the Department of Energy-Office of Science and Technology: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5939.
×

References

Abrams, P. 1991. The predictive ability of peer review of grant proposals: The case of ecology and the U.S. National Science Foundation. Social Studies of Science 21:111-132.

ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers). 1997 (January). Manual for Peer Review. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Center for Research and Technology Development.

ASME. 1996a. Review of the Cost of In Situ Air Stripping of VOC Contaminations in Soils (October 9, 1996): Final Report of the Review Panel . American Society of Mechanical Engineers.

ASME. 1996b, unpublished. Peer Review of the Proposals for Salt Stabilization (November 12-13, 1996): Final Report of the Review Panel (draft). American Society of Mechanical Engineers.


Bozeman, B. 1993. Peer review and evaluation of R&D impacts. Chapter 5 in Evaluating R&D Impacts: Methods and Practice, B. Bozeman and J. Melkers, eds. Boston: Kluwer Publishing.


Chubin, D. 1994. Grants peer review in theory and practice. Evaluation Review 18(1):12-19.

Chubin, D., and E. Hackett. 1990. Peerless Science: Peer Review and U.S. Science Policy. Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press.

Cole, J., and S. Cole. 1979. Which researcher will get the grant? Nature 279:575-576.

Cole, S. 1991. Consensus and reliability of peer review evaluations. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):140-150.

Cole, S., L. Rubin, and J. Cole. 1978. Peer Review in the National Science Foundation. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Cooper, R. G. 1993. Winning at New Products. 2nd edition. New York: Addison Wesley Publishing.

Cozzens, S.E. 1987. Expert review in evaluating programs. Science and Public Policy 14(2):64-71.


DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1996. Draft Description of OST Departmental, Program & Project Level Reviews. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy.

DOE. 1997a. Accelerating Cleanup: Focus on 2006, Discussion Draft. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management.

DOE. 1997b (May). Office of Science and Technology Technical Peer Review Program: Revised Guidance. Version 1.0. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science and Technology.

DOE. 1997c (April). Technology Decision Process Procedure: Working Copy, Revision 7.0. Washington, D.C.; U.S. Department of Energy.


GAO (U.S. General Accounting Office). 1996. Energy Management: Technology Development Program Taking Action to Address Problems. GAO/RCED-96-184. Washington, D.C.: U.S. General Accounting Office.


Koning, R.N. 1990. Peer review. Scientist 4(17):12-14.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1997. Peer Review in the Department of Energy-Office of Science and Technology: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5939.
×

Kostoff, R.N. 1997a. Peer Review: The Appropriate GPRA Metric for Research. Science 277:651-652.

Kostoff, R.N. 1997b. Research program peer review: principles, practices, protocols. (online companion paper to Kostoff [1997a], available at the following universal resource locator: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/kostoff/index.html).

McCullough, J. 1989. First comprehensive survey of NSF applicants focuses on their concerns about proposal review. Science, Technology and Human Values 14:78-98.

Moxham, H., and J. Anderson. 1992. Peer review: A view from the inside. Science and Technology Policy 5(1):7-15.


NRC (National Research Council). 1995a. Allocating Federal Funds for Science and Technology. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

NRC. 1995b. Committee on Environmental Management Technologies Report for the Period Ending December 31, 1994. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

NRC. 1995c. Improving the Environment. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

NRC. 1996. Environmental Management Technology-Development Program at the Department of Energy: 1995 Review. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

NRC. 1997. Building an Effective Environmental Management Science Program: Final Assessment. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.


Paladino, J., and P. Longsworth. 1995. Maximizing R&D Investments in the Department of Energy's Environmental Cleanup Program. Technology Transfer (December):96-107.

Porter, A., and F. Rossini. 1985. Peer review of interdisciplinary research proposals. Science, Technology and Human Values 10(1):33-38.


The Royal Society. 1995. Peer Review: An Assessment of Recent Developments. London: The Royal Society (The U.K. Academy of Sciences).


USNRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1988. Peer Review for High-Level Nuclear Waste Repositories: Generic Technical Position. By W.D. Altman, J.P. Donnelly, and J.E. Kennedy. NUREG-1297. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1997. Peer Review in the Department of Energy-Office of Science and Technology: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5939.
×
Page 31
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 1997. Peer Review in the Department of Energy-Office of Science and Technology: Interim Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5939.
×
Page 32
Next: Appendix A: Description of OST's Peer Review Program »
Peer Review in the Department of Energy-Office of Science and Technology: Interim Report Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $29.00 Buy Ebook | $23.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The Office of Science and Technology (OST) of the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) Office of Environmental Management (EM) recently has instituted a peer review program that uses the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), with administrative and technical support provided by the Institute for Regulatory Science (RSI), to conduct peer reviews of technologies (or groups of technologies) at various stages of development.

OST asked the NRC to convene an expert committee to evaluate the effectiveness of its new peer review program and to make specific recommendations to improve the program, if appropriate. This is the first of two reports to be prepared by this committee on OST's new peer review program. OST requested this interim report to provide a preliminary assessment of OST's new peer review program. In the final report, the committee will provide a more detailed assessment of OST's peer review program after its first complete annual cycle.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!