Research is reviewed on three methods of peer assessment: peer nominations, peer ratings, and peer rankings. Each method is evaluated in terms of its practicality, reliability, validity, freedom from bias, and acceptability. Among the conclusions drawn are that peer assessment can be reliable and valid and that it is best used as part of a multisource approach to performance assessment. Peer nomination has been the subject of the most research and appears to have the highest validity and reliability. Peer rating is the most useful of the three methods for feedback purposes but also produces the least valid, reliable, and unbiased measurements. Peer ranking has been the least researched of the three methods but is by nature the most discriminating method and can incorporate nonmetric scaling advances that might establish it as the all-purpose method of choice.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.