SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Is Peer Review Censorship?
16 references·4 citing·35 second hop
Is Peer Review Censorship? (2009)Is Peer Review Censorship?What is the future of peer review? Why is there fraud in science? Is plagiarism out of control? Why do scientists do bad things? Is it all a case of: "all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"? (2007)What is the future of peer re…The ups and downs of peer review (2007)The ups and downs of peer rev…Peer Review: A Flawed Process at the Heart of Science and Journals (2006)Peer Review: A Flawed Process…Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals (2006)Peer review: a flawed process…Impartial Judgment by the “Gatekeepers” of Science: Fallibility and Accountability in the Peer Review Process (2003)Impartial Judgment by the “Ga…Creationism's Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design (2003)Creationism's Trojan Horse: T…The history of the peer-review process (2002)The history of the peer-revie…Measuring the Quality of Editorial Peer Review (2002)Measuring the Quality of Edit…The essential role of peer review (2001)The essential role of peer re…Something rotten at the core of science? (2001)Something rotten at the core …Reproducibility of peer review in clinical neuroscience: Is agreement between reviewers any greater than would be expected by chance alone? (2000)Reproducibility of peer revie…The Philosophical Basis of Peer Review and the Suppression of Innovation (1990)The Philosophical Basis of Pe…The Evolution of Editorial Peer Review (1990)The Evolution of Editorial Pe…Chance and Consensus in Peer Review (1981)Chance and Consensus in Peer …Peter's Quotations: Ideas for Our Time (1977)Peter's Quotations: Ideas for…Discoveries and opinions of Galileo (1957)Discoveries and opinions of G…Editorial challenges in a small scientific community: Study of Croatian editors (2018)Editorial challenges in a sma…Addressing Reproducibility: Peer Review, Impact Factors, Checklists, Guidelines, and Reproducibility Initiatives (2017)Addressing Reproducibility: P…O processo de revisão por pares: uma revisão integrativa de literatura (2012)O processo de revisão por par…El proceso de “peer-review” en las Revistas Biomédicas: Cualidades de los Revisores de “Excelencia” (2010)El proceso de “peer-review” e…THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF DISEASES OF CHILDREN (1951)Discovering the News: A Social History of American Newspapers (1979)Science as a Process: An Evolutionary Account of the Social and Conceptual Development of Science (1988)Quantitative Research Methods, Study Quality, and Outcomes: The Case of Interaction Research (2011)A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review (2017)Peer Review in 18th-Century Scientific Journalism (1990)Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)Effect of open peer review on quality of reviews and on reviewers'recommendations: a randomised trial (1999)Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies (2007)A Descriptive and Historical Review of Bibliometrics with Applications to Medical Sciences (2015)Impact of interventions to improve the quality of peer review of biomedical journals: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2016)The New Encyclopaedia Britannica (1991)Requisitos uniformes para manuscritos submetidos a periódicos biomédicos: escrevendo e editando para publicações biomédicas (2006)Scientific Utopia: I. Opening Scientific Communication (2012)How well developed are altmetrics? A cross-disciplinary analysis of the presence of ‘alternative metrics’ in scientific publications (2014)The academic, economic and societal impacts of Open Access: an evidence-based review (2016)Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again (1982)Nepotism and sexism in peer-review (1997)A Reliability-Generalization Study of Journal Peer Reviews: A Multilevel Meta-Analysis of Inter-Rater Reliability and Its Determinants (2010)Ranking Games (2014)Comparing quality of reporting between preprints and peer-reviewed articles in the biomedical literature (2020)The printing revolution in early modern Europe (1993)Scientific Representation (2008)A materialist theory of the mind (2017)Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods (2005)Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research (2005)A review of theory and practice in scientometrics (2015)Peer Review in Scientific Publications: Benefits, Critiques, & A Survival Guide. (2014)What is open peer review? A systematic review (2017)Misinformation in and about science (2021)Scientific peer review (2011)Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: a systematic evidence map (2020)From translations to problematic networks: An introduction to co-word analysis (1983)Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research (1997)Cumulative Advantage as a Mechanism for Inequality: A Review of Theoretical and Empirical Developments (2006)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 1957Discoveries and opinions of Galileo970 cited
  • 2006Peer Review: A Flawed Process at the Heart of Science and Journals868 cited
  • 2006Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals794 cited
  • 1981Chance and Consensus in Peer Review623 cited
  • 2002The history of the peer-review process445 cited
  • 1990The Philosophical Basis of Peer Review and the Suppression of Innovation436 cited
  • 1990The Evolution of Editorial Peer Review346 cited
  • 2007The ups and downs of peer review296 cited
  • 2000Reproducibility of peer review in clinical neuroscience: Is agreement between reviewers any greater than would be expected by chance alone?254 cited
  • 2002Measuring the Quality of Editorial Peer Review230 cited
  • 2003Impartial Judgment by the “Gatekeepers” of Science: Fallibility and Accountability in the Peer Review Process199 cited
  • 2003Creationism's Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design175 cited
  • 2001Something rotten at the core of science?105 cited
  • 1977Peter's Quotations: Ideas for Our Time90 cited
  • 2007What is the future of peer review? Why is there fraud in science? Is plagiarism out of control? Why do scientists do bad things? Is it all a case of: "all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"?

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

62 cited
  • 2001The essential role of peer review43 cited
  • Cited by

    • 2012O processo de revisão por pares: uma revisão integrativa de literatura21 cited
    • 2017Addressing Reproducibility: Peer Review, Impact Factors, Checklists, Guidelines, and Reproducibility Initiatives11 cited
    • 2010El proceso de “peer-review” en las Revistas Biomédicas: Cualidades de los Revisores de “Excelencia”10 cited
    • 2018Editorial challenges in a small scientific community: Study of Croatian editors10 cited