Is Peer Review Censorship?

Arturo Casadevall · Ferric C. Fang

32 citations0/0 files storedInfection and Immunity

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Publishing and Scholarly Communication Academic Writing and Publishing Academic Publishing and Open Access

Abstract

“A censor is an expert in cutting remarks.” —Laurence J. Peter ([22][1]) Given the unpleasantness of having one's work rejected ([10][2]), as well as a desire for more-rapid communication of scientific findings, some scientists have expressed nostalgia for the good old days when nearly any

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 32 citations exist upstream.

References

1957Discoveries and opinions of Galileo 2006Peer Review: A Flawed Process at the Heart of Science and Journals 2006Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals 1981Chance and Consensus in Peer Review 2002The history of the peer-review process 1990The Philosophical Basis of Peer Review and the Suppression of Innovation 1990The Evolution of Editorial Peer Review 2007The ups and downs of peer review

Cited by

2012O processo de revisão por pares: uma revisão integrativa de literatura 2017Addressing Reproducibility: Peer Review, Impact Factors, Checklists, Guidelines, and Reproducibility Initiatives 2010El proceso de “peer-review” en las Revistas Biomédicas: Cualidades de los Revisores de “Excelencia”2018Editorial challenges in a small scientific community: Study of Croatian editors

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.