Citation ranking versus peer evaluation of senior faculty research performance: A case study of Kurdish scholarship

The purpose of this study is to analyze the relationship between citation r anking and peer evaluation in assessing senior faculty research performance . Other studies typically derive their peer evaluation data directly from r eferees, often in the form of ranking, This study uses two additional sourc es of peer evaluation data: citation content analysis and book review conte nt analysis. Two main questions are investigated: (a) To what degree does c itation ranking correlate with data from citation content analysis, book re views, and peer ranking? (b) Is citation ranking a valid evaluative indicat or of research performance of senior faculty members? Citation data, book r eviews, and peer ranking were compiled and examined for faculty members spe cializing in Kurdish studies. Analysis shows that normalized citation ranki ng and citation content analysis data yield identical ranking results. Anal ysis also shows that normalized citation ranking and citation content analy sis, book reviews, and peer ranking perform similarly (i.e., are highly cor related) for high-ranked and low-ranked senior scholars, Additional evaluat ion methods and measures that take into account the context and content of research appear to be needed to effectively evaluate senior scholars whose performance ranks relatively in the middle. Citation content analysis data did appear to give some specific and important insights into the quality of research of these middle performers, however, further analysis and researc h is needed to validate this finding. This study shows that citation rankin g can provide a valid indicator for comparative evaluation of senior facult y research performance.