SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Exploring the Peer Review Process: What is it, Does it Work, and Can it Be Improved?
0 references·14 citing·50 second hop
Exploring the Peer Review Process: What is it, Does it Work, and Can it Be Improved? (2009)Exploring the Peer Review Process: What i…A harm reduction approach to improving peer review by acknowledging its imperfections (2024)A harm reduction approach to …Mental health and wellbeing of undergraduate students in engineering: A systematic literature review (2023)Mental health and wellbeing o…Peer reviewers equally critique theory, method, and writing, with limited effect on the final content of accepted manuscripts (2022)Peer reviewers equally critiq…A study of referencing changes in preprint-publication pairs across multiple fields (2022)A study of referencing change…The benefits to climate science of including early-career scientists as reviewers (2020)The benefits to climate scien…Preserving the Quality of Scientific Research: Peer Review of Research Articles (2017)Preserving the Quality of Sci…Interrater reliability and convergent validity of F 1000 P rime peer review (2015)Interrater reliability and co…Improving the reviewing process in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology (2014)Improving the reviewing proce…The ethics of peer review in bioethics (2013)The ethics of peer review in …Evaluations by Peer Review in Science (2013)Evaluations by Peer Review in…Triangulation of Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Panel Peer Review Research (2011)Triangulation of Qualitative …The Hawthorne effect in journal peer review (2011)The Hawthorne effect in journ…Peer Review and Bibliometric: Potentials and Problems (2011)Peer Review and Bibliometric:…Is interactive open access publishing able to identify high-impact submissions? A study on the predictive validity of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics by using percentile rank classes (2010)Is interactive open access pu…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)“Publicationism” and scientists’ satisfaction depend on gender, career stage and the wider academic system (2017)Fundamental problems in the peer‐review process and stakeholders' perceptions of potential suggestions for improvement (2024)Primary, Secondary, and Meta-Analysis of Research (1976)Developing criteria for establishing interrater reliability of specific items: applications to assessment of adaptive behavior. (1981)What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior (2008)Relative Citation Ratio (RCR): An empirical attempt to study a new field‐normalized bibliometric indicator (2016)What are we measuring? Refocusing on some fundamentals in the age of desktop bibliometrics (2018)Engaging young scholars in science through publication: A survey analysis of published middle and high school authors (2022)Patterns of evaluation in science: Institutionalisation, structure and functions of the referee system (1971)Real science what it is, and what it means (2000)Real Science (2000)The author–editor game (2015)Наукометрія та управління науковою діяльністю: вкотре про світове та українське (2019)The use of OpenAlex to produce meaningful bibliometric global overlay maps of science on the individual, institutional, and national levels (2024)A Theory of Justice (1971)Does Masking Author Identity Improve Peer Review Quality? (1998)Effects of Editorial Peer Review (2002)Ethics in Peer Review of Academic Journal Articles as Perceived by Authors in the Educational Sciences (2018)Peering into the Future of Peer Review (2018)Rigor and reproducibility for data analysis and design in the behavioral sciences (2020)Beyond significance testing: Reforming data analysis methods in behavioral research. (2004)Science and Engineering Indicators (2004)Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research (2005)Citation rates in mathematics: a study of variation by subdiscipline (2012)Citation score normalized by cited references (CSNCR): The introduction of a new citation impact indicator (2016)Citation score normalized by cited references (CSNCR): The introduction of a new citation impact indicator (2016)Research methods in anthropology: qualitative and quantitative approaches (2002)Group Performance and Decision Making (2004)How professors think: inside the curious world of academic judgment (2009)The peer review process for awarding funds to international science research consortia: a qualitative developmental evaluation (2018)Support for climate policy and societal action are linked to perceptions about scientific agreement (2011)The pivotal role of perceived scientific consensus in acceptance of science (2012)Journals invite too few women to referee (2017)Comparison of early career researchers and senior career researchers as peer reviewers: A questionnaire survey in China (2022)The qualitative content analysis process (2008)The Diversity–Innovation Paradox in Science (2020)Large-scale comparison of bibliographic data sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, Crossref, and Microsoft Academic (2021)Does peer review improve the statistical content of manuscripts? A study on 27 467 submissions to four journals (2022)Predicting substantive biomedical citations without full text (2023)Manuscript Quality before and after Peer Review and Editing at Annals of Internal Medicine (1994)Reasons Reviewers Reject and Accept Manuscripts (2001)The evolving role of preprints in the dissemination of COVID-19 research and their impact on the science communication landscape (2021)Textual features of peer review predict top-cited papers: An interpretable machine learning perspective (2024)The PHQ-9 (2001)A Brief Measure for Assessing Generalized Anxiety Disorder (2006)Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (2013)
this work references cited by second hop

References

No references inside the corpus for this window.

Cited by

  • 2023Mental health and wellbeing of undergraduate students in engineering: A systematic literature review59 cited
  • 2010Is interactive open access publishing able to identify high-impact submissions? A study on the predictive validity of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics by using percentile rank classes39 cited
  • 2015Interrater reliability and convergent validity of F 1000 P rime peer review34 cited
  • 2011The Hawthorne effect in journal peer review31 cited
  • 2022A study of referencing changes in preprint-publication pairs across multiple fields27 cited
  • 2022Peer reviewers equally critique theory, method, and writing, with limited effect on the final content of accepted manuscripts20 cited
  • 2011Triangulation of Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Panel Peer Review Research17 cited
  • 2020The benefits to climate science of including early-career scientists as reviewers17 cited
  • 2014Improving the reviewing process in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology16 cited
  • 2013The ethics of peer review in bioethics16 cited
  • 2011Peer Review and Bibliometric: Potentials and Problems16 cited
  • 2017Preserving the Quality of Scientific Research: Peer Review of Research Articles15 cited
  • 2013Evaluations by Peer Review in Science14 cited

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

2024
A harm reduction approach to improving peer review by acknowledging its imperfections
8 cited