SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
The Reliability of Peer Reviews of Papers on Information Systems
14 references·5 citing·39 second hop
The Reliability of Peer Reviews of Papers on Information Systems (2004)The Reliability of Peer Reviews of Papers…The Effects of Double-Blind versus Single-Blind Reviewing: Experimental Evidence from The American Economic Review (2016)The Effects of Double-Blind v…A multifaceted portrait of a library and information science journal: the case of the Journal of Information Science (2003)A multifaceted portrait of a …Something rotten at the core of science? (2001)Something rotten at the core …Editorial peer review : its strengths and weaknesses (2001)Editorial peer review : its s…Reproducibility of peer review in clinical neuroscience: Is agreement between reviewers any greater than would be expected by chance alone? (2000)Reproducibility of peer revie…Development of the Review Quality Instrument (RQI) for Assessing Peer Reviews of Manuscripts (1999)Development of the Review Qua…The Medical Journal of Australia internet peer-review study (1998)The Medical Journal of Austra…How reliable is peer review? An examination of operating grant proposals simultaneously submitted to two similar peer review systems (1997)How reliable is peer review? …Guardians of Science: Fairness and Reliability of Peer Review (1994)Guardians of Science: Fairnes…Guardians of Science (1993)Guardians of ScienceProblems Identified by Secondary Review of Accepted Manuscripts (1990)Problems Identified by Second…But the reviewers are making different criticisms of my paper! Diversity and uniqueness in reviewer comments. (1990)But the reviewers are making …Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again (1982)Peer-review practices of psyc…A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales (1960)A Coefficient of Agreement fo…Context-Aware Reviewer Assignment for Trust Enhanced Peer Review (2015)Context-Aware Reviewer Assign…How good is a model based on bibliometric indicators in predicting the final decisions made by peers? (2014)How good is a model based on …Definition of a model based on bibliometric indicators for assessing applicants to academic positions (2014)Definition of a model based o…Three empirical studies on the agreement of reviewers about the quality of software engineering experiments (2011)Three empirical studies on th…The basis for evidence‐based practice: evaluating the research evidence (2006)The basis for evidence‐based …The Philosophical Basis of Peer Review and the Suppression of Innovation (1990)When worlds collide: Social science, politics, and the Rind et al. (1998) child sexual abuse meta-analysis. (2002)Peering at peer review revealed high degree of chance associated with funding of grant applications (2006)Saint Matthew strikes again: An agent-based model of peer review and the scientific community structure (2012)Publishing in the Organizational Sciences. (1986)Science and Pseudoscience in Communication Disorders (2005)The Air We Breathe: A Critical Look at Practices and Alternatives in the Peer-Review Process (2009)Getting Through the Gate (2016)Weighted kappa: Nominal scale agreement provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. (1968)Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use (1989)The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. (1998)Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies (2007)What errors do peer reviewers detect, and does training improve their ability to detect them? (2008)A systematic review of tools used to assess the quality of observational studies that examine incidence or prevalence and risk factors for diseases (2010)Statistical principles in experimental design. (1962)The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1963)Toward an experimental ecology of human development. (1977)Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. (1995)Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Sustainability (2011)The Significance of Insecure and Disorganized Attachment for Children’s Internalizing Symptoms: A Meta-Analytic Study (2012)Chance and Consensus in Peer Review (1981)Nepotism and sexism in peer-review (1997)Ranking Games (2014)Comparing quality of reporting between preprints and peer-reviewed articles in the biomedical literature (2020)Chapter 48 Race and gender in the labor market (1999)Orchestrating Impartiality: The Impact of “Blind” Auditions on Female Musicians (2000)Women in Academic Science (2014)A Reliability-Generalization Study of Journal Peer Reviews: A Multilevel Meta-Analysis of Inter-Rater Reliability and Its Determinants (2010)Impact factor: outdated artefact or stepping-stone to journal certification? (2011)“Excellence R Us”: university research and the fetishisation of excellence (2017)The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data (1977)Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-Age Children-Present and Lifetime Version (K-SADS-PL): Initial Reliability and Validity Data (1997)Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic (2012)Selection of research fellowship recipients by committee peer review. Reliability, fairness and predictive validity of Board of Trustees' decisions (2005)Selecting scientific excellence through committee peer review - A citation analysis of publications previously published to approval or rejection of post-doctoral research fellowship applicants (2006)Does the Committee Peer Review Select the Best Applicants for Funding? An Investigation of the Selection Process for Two European Molecular Biology Organization Programmes (2008)Selecting manuscripts for a high‐impact journal through peer review: A citation analysis of communications that were accepted by Angewandte Chemie International Edition, or rejected but published elsewhere (2008)Peer review of grant applications in biology and medicine. Reliability, fairness, and validity (2009)A Multilevel Modelling Approach to Investigating the Predictive Validity of Editorial Decisions: Do the Editors of a High Profile Journal Select Manuscripts that are Highly Cited After Publication? (2011)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 1960A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales42,335 cited
  • 1982Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again1,071 cited
  • 2016The Effects of Double-Blind versus Single-Blind Reviewing: Experimental Evidence from The American Economic Review425 cited
  • 2000Reproducibility of peer review in clinical neuroscience: Is agreement between reviewers any greater than would be expected by chance alone?254 cited
  • 2001Editorial peer review : its strengths and weaknesses231 cited
  • 1999Development of the Review Quality Instrument (RQI) for Assessing Peer Reviews of Manuscripts177 cited
  • 1990But the reviewers are making different criticisms of my paper! Diversity and uniqueness in reviewer comments.142 cited
  • 1993Guardians of Science111 cited
  • 1994Guardians of Science: Fairness and Reliability of Peer Review109 cited
  • 2001Something rotten at the core of science?105 cited
  • 1990Problems Identified by Secondary Review of Accepted Manuscripts72 cited
  • 1998The Medical Journal of Australia internet peer-review study52 cited
  • 2003A multifaceted portrait of a library and information science journal: the case of the Journal of Information Science51 cited
  • 1997How reliable is peer review? An examination of operating grant proposals simultaneously submitted to two similar peer review systems

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

48 cited

Cited by

  • 2014How good is a model based on bibliometric indicators in predicting the final decisions made by peers?32 cited
  • 2014Definition of a model based on bibliometric indicators for assessing applicants to academic positions27 cited
  • 2015Context-Aware Reviewer Assignment for Trust Enhanced Peer Review27 cited
  • 2006The basis for evidence‐based practice: evaluating the research evidence23 cited
  • 2011Three empirical studies on the agreement of reviewers about the quality of software engineering experiments22 cited