Citation map · Study

SZodixStudyAcademic Library

Shelves Open access

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

Safeguarding the Integrity of Science Communication by Restraining 'Rational Cheating' in Peer Review

12 references·2 citing·48 second hop

FromToDepth

this work references cited by second hop

References

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
2013Why Has the Number of Scientific Retractions Increased?423 cited
2011The Singapore Statement on Research Integrity316 cited
2003Impartial Judgment by the “Gatekeepers” of Science: Fallibility and Accountability in the Peer Review Process199 cited
2005Selection of research fellowship recipients by committee peer review. Reliability, fairness and predictive validity of Board of Trustees' decisions125 cited
2012Does incentive provision increase the quality of peer review? An experimental study102 cited
2011Peer-review in a world with rational scientists: Toward selection of the average83 cited
2012Best peer reviewers and the quality of peer review in biomedical journals47 cited
2014Mechanism change in a simulation of peer review: from junk support to elitism28 cited
2013Research study designs: an appraisal for peer reviewers and science editors26 cited
2013Cascading peer review for open-access publishing17 cited

Cited by

2015Predatory Publishing Practices Corrode the Credibility of Science6 cited
2025Does the disconnect between the peer-reviewed label and reality explain the peer review crisis, and can open peer review or preprints resolve it? A narrative review

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

5 cited