SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
The Golden Rule of Reviewing
0 references·16 citing·44 second hop
The Golden Rule of Reviewing (2009)The Golden Rule of ReviewingHow to Be a Great Peer Reviewer (2022)How to Be a Great Peer Review…Does Peer Reviewing for COVID-19-Related Papers Still Work? (2020)Does Peer Reviewing for COVID…Writing an effective response to a manuscript review (2016)Writing an effective response…Improving the reviewing process in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology (2014)Improving the reviewing proce…Imbalance in Individual Researcher's Peer Review Activities Quantified for Four British Ecological Society Journals, 2003-2010 (2014)Imbalance in Individual Resea…A New “Golden Rule” for Peer Review? (2014)A New “Golden Rule” for Peer …Learning to review submissions to peer reviewed journals: how do they do it? (2013)Learning to review submission…Collegiality versus Competition: How Metrics Shape Scientific Communities (2013)Collegiality versus Competiti…A Three-Decade History of the Duration of Peer Review (2013)A Three-Decade History of the…Reduce, reuse, recycle scientific reviews (2012)Reduce, reuse, recycle scient…On Editing the International Journal of Primatology (2012)On Editing the International …Modeling peer review: an agent-based approach (2012)Modeling peer review: an agen…Perspectives from early career researchers on the publication process in ecology - a response to Statzner & Resh (2010) (2011)Perspectives from early caree…Injecting youth into peer-review to increase its sustainability: a case study of ecology journals (2010)Injecting youth into peer-rev…Hindrance of Conservation Biology by Delays in the Submission of Manuscripts (2010)Hindrance of Conservation Bio…WWDD? (What Would Darwin Do?) (2009)WWDD? (What Would Darwin Do?)Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research (1997)An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output (2005)The culture of the new capitalism (2006)Addressing editor(ial) malpractice in scientific journals (2012)Scientific Publications: Moving beyond Quality and Quantity toward Influence (2013)The Publishing Game: Getting More for Less (1981)The Assessment of Science: The Relative Merits of Post-Publication Review, the Impact Factor, and the Number of Citations (2013)Who's Afraid of Peer Review? (2013)Who are our reviewers and how do they review? The profile and work of Biological Conservation reviewers (2016)Publication Overlap: Building an Academic House with Salami Shingles (2018)Fundamental problems in the peer‐review process and stakeholders' perceptions of potential suggestions for improvement (2024)The mismeasurement of science (2007)Predicting scientific success (2012)Are Current Research Evaluation Metrics Causing a Tragedy of the Scientific Commons and the Extinction of University-Based Fisheries Programs? (2014)Journal of Research Administration (2023)An Incentive Solution to the Peer Review Problem (2007)The tragedy of the reviewer commons* (2008)Pubcreds: Fixing the Peer Review Process by “Privatizing” the Reviewer Commons (2010)With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility: the Importance of Rejection, Power, and Editors in the Practice of Scientific Publishing (2013)Effects of training on quality of peer review: randomised controlled trial (2004)Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals (2006)Innovation Suppression and Clique Evolution in Peer-Review-Based, Competitive Research Funding Systems: An Agent-Based Model (2015)Will technology trample peer review in ecology? Ongoing issues and potential solutions (2015)Editorial behaviors in peer review (2016)The politics of publication (2003)Reviewing Peer Review (2008)Reviewer overload and what can we do about it (2014)Ethics in Peer Review of Academic Journal Articles as Perceived by Authors in the Educational Sciences (2018)The history of the peer-review process (2002)Seeking acceptance in an English-only research world (2007)Does Writing for Publication Ever Get Easier? Some Reflections from an Experienced Scholar (2018)Which Are the Tools Available for Scholars? A Review of Assisting Software for Authors during Peer Reviewing Process (2019)Peer review (2020)The Evolution of Reciprocal Altruism (1971)Human cooperation (2013)La revisión por pares (“peer review”) en las revistas científicas: un proceso que requiere intervención (2019)Ten Simple Rules for Getting Published (2005)How to write consistently boring scientific literature (2007)Double-blind peer review of manuscripts: opportunities, challenges, and way forward (2020)Following the Equator: A Journey Around the World (1897)How to reply to referees' comments when submitting manuscripts for publication (2004)Writing science: how to write papers that get cited and proposals that get funded (2013)Teaching graduate students how to review research articles and respond to reviewer comments (2019)Scientific Publishing in Biomedicine: Revising a Peer-reviewed Manuscript (2022)
this work references cited by second hop

References

No references inside the corpus for this window.

Cited by

  • 2012Modeling peer review: an agent-based approach26 cited
  • 2013A Three-Decade History of the Duration of Peer Review26 cited
  • 2011Perspectives from early career researchers on the publication process in ecology - a response to Statzner & Resh (2010)22 cited
  • 2013Learning to review submissions to peer reviewed journals: how do they do it?22 cited
  • 2010Injecting youth into peer-review to increase its sustainability: a case study of ecology journals21 cited
  • 2014Imbalance in Individual Researcher's Peer Review Activities Quantified for Four British Ecological Society Journals, 2003-201020 cited
  • 2012Reduce, reuse, recycle scientific reviews17 cited
  • 2014Improving the reviewing process in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology16 cited
  • 2013Collegiality versus Competition: How Metrics Shape Scientific Communities16 cited
  • 2016Writing an effective response to a manuscript review13 cited
  • 2010Hindrance of Conservation Biology by Delays in the Submission of Manuscripts12 cited
  • 2014A New “Golden Rule” for Peer Review?12 cited
  • 2012On Editing the International Journal of Primatology12 cited
  • 2020Does Peer Reviewing for COVID-19-Related Papers Still Work?

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

9 cited
  • 2009WWDD? (What Would Darwin Do?)9 cited
  • 2022How to Be a Great Peer Reviewer8 cited