Citation map · Study

SZodixStudyAcademic Library

Shelves Open access

Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated

Pubcreds: Fixing the Peer Review Process by “Privatizing” the Reviewer Commons

1 references·16 citing·50 second hop

FromToDepth

this work references cited by second hop

References

2007An Incentive Solution to the Peer Review Problem175 cited

Cited by

2017Can editors save peer review from peer reviewers?80 cited
2024The crisis of peer review: Part of the evolution of science70 cited
2017“Let the community decide”? The vision and reality of soundness-only peer review in open-access mega-journals59 cited
2013Beyond dead trees: integrating the scientific process in the Biodiversity Data Journal43 cited
2014Current and Evolving Models of Peer Review36 cited
2021Peer-reviewing in Surgical Journals: Revolutionize or Perish?34 cited
2015The evolution of peer review as a basis for scientific publication: directional selection towards a robust discipline?34 cited
2016Is it becoming harder to secure reviewers for peer review? A test with data from five ecology journals28 cited
2013A Three-Decade History of the Duration of Peer Review26 cited
2015The missing metric: quantifying contributions of reviewers25 cited
2012Peer review in a rapidly evolving publishing landscape24 cited
2010How should we deal with the growing peer-review problem?23 cited
2021Writing and Publishing Scientific Papers22 cited
2012

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

Aggregating post-publication peer reviews and ratings

20 cited

2011Reviewing Peer Review19 cited

2020Token‐curated registry in a scholarly journal: Can blockchain support journal communities?18 cited