SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
What Rights Do Authors Have?
1 references·16 citing·47 second hop
What Rights Do Authors Have? (2016)What Rights Do Authors Have?Responsible Research Publication: International Standards for Authors (2014)Responsible Research Publicat…Attitudes, willingness, and resources to cover article publishing charges: The influence of age, position, income level country, discipline and open access habits (2022)Attitudes, willingness, and r…The right to refuse unwanted citations: rethinking the culture of science around the citation (2021)The right to refuse unwanted …Multiple co-first authors, co-corresponding authors and co-supervisors: a synthesis of shared authorship credit (2021)Multiple co-first authors, co…Fortification of retraction notices to improve their transparency and usefulness (2021)Fortification of retraction n…The ICMJE recommendations: challenges in fortifying publishing integrity (2020)The ICMJE recommendations: ch…Rewarding the quantity of peer review could harm biomedical research (2019)Rewarding the quantity of pee…Challenges to open peer review (2018)Challenges to open peer reviewShould Authors be Requested to Suggest Peer Reviewers? (2017)Should Authors be Requested t…Is Biomedical Research Protected from Predatory Reviewers? (2017)Is Biomedical Research Protec…Ethical exceptionalism: can publishing rules be manipulated to give the impression of ethical publishing? (2017)Ethical exceptionalism: can p…Establishing Sensible and Practical Guidelines for Desk Rejections (2017)Establishing Sensible and Pra…Threats to the Survival of the Author-Pays-Journal to Publish Model (2016)Threats to the Survival of th…The ethics of peer and editorial requests for self-citation of their work and journal (2016)The ethics of peer and editor…Protecting Authors from Predatory Journals and Publishers (2016)Protecting Authors from Preda…How are Editors Selected, Recruited and Approved? (2016)How are Editors Selected, Rec…Excessively Long Editorial Decisions and Excessively Long Publication Times by Journals: Causes, Risks, Consequences, and Proposed Solutions (2016)Excessively Long Editorial De…Investigating journals: The dark side of publishing (2013)Firm action needed on predatory journals (2015)The pressure to publish pushes down quality (2016)The manipulation of scholarly rating and measurement systems: constructing excellence in an era of academic stardom (2017)Kscien's list; a new strategy to hoist predatory journals and publishers (2019)Publishing in predatory open access journals: Authors' perspectives (2019)Impartial Judgment by the “Gatekeepers” of Science: Fallibility and Accountability in the Peer Review Process (2003)Peer review process in medical research publications: Language and content comments (2009)Publishing: The peer-review scam (2014)The Clarivate TM Analytics acquisition of Publons – an evolution or commodification of peer review? (2017)Silently withdrawn or retracted preprints related to Covid-19 are a scholarly threat and a potential public health risk: theoretical arguments and suggested recommendations (2020)Science journal editors’ views on publication ethics: results of an international survey (2009)Responsible Research Publication: International Standards for Editors (2014)Ensuring the Quality, Fairness, and Integrity of Journal Peer Review: A Possible Role of Editors (2015)Curriculum vitae: challenges and potential solutions (2020)Conflicts of Interest Arising from Simultaneous Service by Editors of Competing Journals or Publishers (2021)Publish or perish in China (2010)Beat it, impact factor! Publishing elite turns against controversial metric (2016)A brief review on article-, author-, and journal-level scientometric indices (2022)Measuring the Quality of Editorial Peer Review (2002)Duration and quality of the peer review process: the author’s perspective (2017)Harvard Undergraduate Health Policy Review (2023)Effect on peer review of telling reviewers that their signed reviews might be posted on the web: randomised controlled trial (2010)Multi-Stage Open Peer Review: Scientific Evaluation Integrating the Strengths of Traditional Peer Review with the Virtues of Transparency and Self-Regulation (2012)Problems with Traditional Science Publishing and Finding a Wider Niche for Post-Publication Peer Review (2014)Does open peer review improve citation count? Evidence from a propensity score matching analysis of PeerJ (2020)Classification and analysis of PubPeer comments: How a web journal club is used (2021)The Role of Publons in the Context of Open Peer Review (2022)Author Sequence and Credit for Contributions in Multiauthored Publications (2007)A Systematic Review of Research on the Meaning, Ethics and Practices of Authorship across Scholarly Disciplines (2011)Beyond authorship: attribution, contribution, collaboration, and credit (2015)Handling Ethics Dumping and Neo-Colonial Research: From the Laboratory to the Academic Literature (2022)A systematic scoping review of the ethics of Contributor Role Ontologies and Taxonomies (2023)Understanding co‐corresponding authorship: A bibliometric analysis and detailed overview (2023)Publication bias in meta-analysis its causes and consequences (2000)The (ir)rational consideration of the cost of science in transition economies (2017)Reform retractions to make them more transparent (2020)Study of the Causes and Consequences of Cloned Journal Publications (2022)t-index: entropy based random document and citation analysis using average h-index (2022)Bestiary of Questionable Research Practices in Psychology (2025)Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications (2012)Academic Librarians and Their Role in Disseminating Accurate Knowledge and Information about the Gray Zone in Predatory Publishing (2022)Non‐author entities accountable for retractions: A diachronic and cross‐disciplinary exploration of reasons for retraction (2022)Integrity of randomized clinical trials: Performance of integrity tests and checklists requires assessment (2023)A proposal for ethical research conduct in Madagascar (2016)The RECORD reporting guidelines: meeting the methodological and ethical demands of transparency in research using routinely-collected health data (2016)On interference, collegiality and co-authorship: Peer review of journal articles in management and organization studies (2018)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2014Responsible Research Publication: International Standards for Authors58 cited

Cited by

  • 2021Fortification of retraction notices to improve their transparency and usefulness46 cited
  • 2016Protecting Authors from Predatory Journals and Publishers41 cited
  • 2018Challenges to open peer review39 cited
  • 2016Excessively Long Editorial Decisions and Excessively Long Publication Times by Journals: Causes, Risks, Consequences, and Proposed Solutions37 cited
  • 2021The right to refuse unwanted citations: rethinking the culture of science around the citation37 cited
  • 2016The ethics of peer and editorial requests for self-citation of their work and journal36 cited
  • 2017Establishing Sensible and Practical Guidelines for Desk Rejections33 cited
  • 2021Multiple co-first authors, co-corresponding authors and co-supervisors: a synthesis of shared authorship credit30 cited
  • 2016How are Editors Selected, Recruited and Approved?27 cited
  • 2016Threats to the Survival of the Author-Pays-Journal to Publish Model26 cited
  • 2017Ethical exceptionalism: can publishing rules be manipulated to give the impression of ethical publishing?25 cited
  • 2022Attitudes, willingness, and resources to cover article publishing charges: The influence of age, position, income level country, discipline and open access habits23 cited

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

2017
Should Authors be Requested to Suggest Peer Reviewers?
22 cited
  • 2017Is Biomedical Research Protected from Predatory Reviewers?21 cited
  • 2020The ICMJE recommendations: challenges in fortifying publishing integrity20 cited
  • 2019Rewarding the quantity of peer review could harm biomedical research16 cited