Citation map · Study

SZodixStudyAcademic Library

Shelves Open access

Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated

The Case for Reviewing as Collaboration and Response

16 references·1 citing·43 second hop

FromToDepth

this work references cited by second hop

References

1982Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again1,071 cited
1981Chance and Consensus in Peer Review623 cited
1991Singular Texts/Plural Authors: Perspectives on Collaborative Writing515 cited
1991The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigation496 cited
2008Rhetoric of Science463 cited
1991Chaos Bound: Orderly Disorder in Contemporary Literature and Science.382 cited
1989The Making of Knowledge in Composition: Portrait of an Emerging Field339 cited
1991Elements of Rhetoric207 cited
1990Reliability, Validity, and Holistic Scoring: What We Know and What We Need to Know180 cited
1972Improving manuscript evaluation procedures.159 cited
1987Response to Student Writing138 cited
1989The Peer Review Process Used to Evaluate Manuscripts Submitted to Academic Journals120 cited
1983Peer Commentary on Peer Review: A Case Study in Scientific Quality Control99 cited
1970Journal reviewing practices: Authors' and APA members' suggestions for revision.98 cited
1992Collaboration Is Not Collaboration Is Not Collaboration: Writing Center Tutorials vs. Peer-Response Groups

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

89 cited

1990GENDER FACTORS IN REVIEWER RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MANUSCRIPT PUBLICATION85 cited

Cited by

2019A Study of the Practices and Responsibilities of Scholarly Peer Review in Rhetoric and Composition7 cited