title: Looking for the impact of peer review: does count of funding acknowledgements really predict research impact?
abstract: A small number of studies have sought to establish that research papers with more funding acknowledgements achieve higher impact and have claimed that such a link exists because research supported by more funding bodies undergoes more peer review. In this paper, a test of this link is made using recently available data from the Web of Science, a source of bibliographic data that now includes funding acknowledgements. The analysis uses 3,596 papers from a single year, 2009, and a single journal, the Journal of Biological Chemistry. Analysis of this data using OLS regression and two ranks tests reveals the link between count of funding acknowledgements and high impact papers to be statistically significant, but weak. It is concluded that count of funding acknowledgements should not be considered a reliable indicator of research impact at this level. Relatedly, indicators based on assumptions that may hold true at one level of analysis may not be appropriate at other levels.
authors.affiliation: University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
authors.forename: John
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Rigby
keywords: Funding acknowledgements; Indicators; Log transformation; Peer review; Regression