What We Owe The Author: rethinking editorial peer review

Nancy Crigger

8 citations0/0 files storedNursing Ethics

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 integrity and plagiarism

Abstract

Editorial peer reviewers play an important role in shaping the direction of knowledge growth of their discipline. Recent concern over reports of peer review misconduct has led some to advocate the establishment of a code of ethics for peer reviewers. Such a code should include guidelines for the discipline and for society at large, but it should also contain guidelines for the authors whose manuscripts are reviewed. Peer reviewers have a special obligation to show beneficence and fairness or impartiality towards the authors for whom they review. The practical application of these two ethical concepts is discussed.

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 — 8 citations exist upstream.

References

1984The Structure of Scientific Revolutions 1981Moral Thinking 1990The Philosophical Basis of Peer Review and the Suppression of Innovation 1994Morality, Utilitarianism, and Rights.1995Ethics of scientific research 1986Guarding the Guardians: A Conference on Editorial Peer Review 1983Ethics and impartiality 2006Ethics in Scientific Research

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.