SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
A Proposed Currency System for Academic Peer Review Payments Using the BlockChain Technology
1 references·4 citing·17 second hop
A Proposed Currency System for Academic Peer Review Payments Using the BlockChain Technology (2017)A Proposed Currency System for Academic P…Firm action needed on predatory journals (2015)Firm action needed on predato…Paying peer reviewers: benefits, risks, and challenges (2026)Paying peer reviewers: benefi…The changing research landscape and reflections on national research assessment in the future (2019)The changing research landsca…ICIS 2017 Panel Report: Break Your Shackles! Emancipating Information Systems from the Tyranny of Peer Review (2018)ICIS 2017 Panel Report: Break…Academic Publishing and its Digital Binds: Beyond the Paywall towards Ethical Executions of Code (2018)Academic Publishing and its D…THE STATE OF EXCEPTION (2005)The Oligopoly of Academic Publishers in the Digital Era (2015)Global patterns in the publishing of academic knowledge: Global North, global South (2016)The Logic of Scientific Discovery. (1959)The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1963)Research Commentary: Desperately Seeking the “IT” in IT Research—A Call to Theorizing the IT Artifact (2001)Nepotism and sexism in peer-review (1997)Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)Promoting an open research culture (2015)Overview of Development and Recent Trends in Bibliometrics and Research Evaluation (2021)Canadian approaches to research impact and its assessment (2024)What motivates academic scientists to engage in research commercialization: ‘Gold’, ‘ribbon’ or ‘puzzle’? (2011)The limitations to our understanding of peer review (2020)The strain on scientific publishing (2024)‘Predatory’ open access: a longitudinal study of article volumes and market characteristics (2015)Potential predatory and legitimate biomedical journals: can you tell the difference? A cross-sectional comparison (2017)Predatory journals: Who publishes in them and why? (2018)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2015Firm action needed on predatory journals242 cited

Cited by

  • 2019The changing research landscape and reflections on national research assessment in the future12 cited
  • 2018Academic Publishing and its Digital Binds: Beyond the Paywall towards Ethical Executions of Code8 cited
  • 2018ICIS 2017 Panel Report: Break Your Shackles! Emancipating Information Systems from the Tyranny of Peer Review7 cited
  • 2026Paying peer reviewers: benefits, risks, and challenges5 cited

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