SZodixStudyAcademic Library
DashboardShelvesOpen accessMy libraryInboxNotesWriteLearnAlerts
More
Ask your libraryNotificationsQuick citeReview
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
The impact of peer review on the contribution potential of scientific papers
16 references·4 citing·44 second hop
The impact of peer review on the contribution potential of scientific papers (2021)The impact of peer review on the contribu…The effect of publishing peer review reports on referee behavior in five scholarly journals (2019)The effect of publishing peer…Are Referees and Editors in Economics Gender Neutral?* (2019)Are Referees and Editors in E…Science of science (2018)Science of scienceNIH funding longevity by gender (2018)NIH funding longevity by gend…How the entire scientific community can confront gender bias in the workplace (2018)How the entire scientific com…Author-Reviewer Homophily in Peer Review (2018)Author-Reviewer Homophily in …Reviewer bias in single- versus double-blind peer review (2017)Reviewer bias in single- vers…Gender diversity leads to better science (2017)Gender diversity leads to bet…The Global Burden of Journal Peer Review in the Biomedical Literature: Strong Imbalance in the Collective Enterprise (2016)The Global Burden of Journal …Peer Review Quality and Transparency of the Peer-Review Process in Open Access and Subscription Journals (2016)Peer Review Quality and Trans…Firm action needed on predatory journals (2015)Firm action needed on predato…Scientific peer review (2011)Scientific peer reviewAn index to quantify an individual's scientific research output (2005)An index to quantify an indiv…Effects of training on quality of peer review: randomised controlled trial (2004)Effects of training on qualit…Does Masking Author Identity Improve Peer Review Quality? (1998)Does Masking Author Identity …Implementing peer review on the net: scientific quality control in scholarly electronic journals (1996)Implementing peer review on t…Textual features of peer review predict top-cited papers: An interpretable machine learning perspective (2024)Textual features of peer revi…Are the confidence scores of reviewers consistent with the review content? Evidence from top conference proceedings in AI (2024)Are the confidence scores of …The academic status of reviewers predicts their language use (2023)The academic status of review…MOPRD: A multidisciplinary open peer review dataset (2023)MOPRD: A multidisciplinary op…Assessing the quality of reports of randomised trials: implications for the conduct of meta-analyses. (1999)Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies (2007)The Effects of Double-Blind versus Single-Blind Reviewing: Experimental Evidence from The American Economic Review (2016)What is open peer review? A systematic review (2017)The Logic of Scientific Discovery. (1960)THE STRUCTURE OF SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTIONS (1963)The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1963)A review of theory and practice in scientometrics (2015)Growth rates of modern science: A bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references (2015)Citations, Citation Indicators, and Research Quality: An Overview of Basic Concepts and Theories (2019)Effect of Blinding and Unmasking on the Quality of Peer Review (1998)Effect of open peer review on quality of reviews and on reviewers'recommendations: a randomised trial (1999)Peer Review in Health Sciences (1999)How to identify randomized controlled trials in MEDLINE: ten years on. (2006)The Development of Open Access Journal Publishing from 1993 to 2009 (2011)Peer review in a changing world: An international study measuring the attitudes of researchers (2012)The STM Report: An overview of scientific and scholarly journal publishing (2015)Meta-research: Why research on research matters (2018)On the value of preprints: An early career researcher perspective (2019)Can Large Language Models Provide Useful Feedback on Research Papers? A Large-Scale Empirical Analysis (2024)Evidence for a Collective Intelligence Factor in the Performance of Human Groups (2010)COVID-19 medical papers have fewer women first authors than expected (2020)Decoloniality and anti-oppressive practices for a more ethical ecology (2021)Gender bias in academia: A lifetime problem that needs solutions (2021)The Matthew Effect in Science (1968)The Matthew effect in science. The reward and communication systems of science are considered. (1968)Gender in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: Issues, Causes, Solutions (2019)Quantifying hierarchy and dynamics in US faculty hiring and retention (2022)The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. (1979)Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences (2015)Historical comparison of gender inequality in scientific careers across countries and disciplines (2020)The Diversity–Innovation Paradox in Science (2020)Effects of Editorial Peer Review (2002)A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review (2017)Gender gap in journal submissions and peer review during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. A study on 2329 Elsevier journals (2021)Peer review and gender bias: A study on 145 scholarly journals (2021)Selection on Observed and Unobserved Variables: Assessing the Effectiveness of Catholic Schools (2005)A Grand Gender Convergence: Its Last Chapter (2014)American Economic Review (2019)Publishing While Female: are Women Held to Higher Standards? Evidence from Peer Review (2022)The Old Boys’ Club: Schmoozing and the Gender Gap (2023)Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics (2015)The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact? (2015)bibliometrix : An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis (2017)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2005An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output11,612 cited
  • 2018Science of science1,494 cited
  • 2017Reviewer bias in single- versus double-blind peer review605 cited
  • 2011Scientific peer review563 cited
  • 2017Gender diversity leads to better science553 cited
  • 2019Are Referees and Editors in Economics Gender Neutral?*297 cited
  • 1998Does Masking Author Identity Improve Peer Review Quality?278 cited
  • 2019The effect of publishing peer review reports on referee behavior in five scholarly journals276 cited
  • 2004Effects of training on quality of peer review: randomised controlled trial268 cited
  • 2016The Global Burden of Journal Peer Review in the Biomedical Literature: Strong Imbalance in the Collective Enterprise246 cited
  • 2015Firm action needed on predatory journals242 cited
  • 1996Implementing peer review on the net: scientific quality control in scholarly electronic journals180 cited
  • 2018How the entire scientific community can confront gender bias in the workplace172 cited
  • 2018Author-Reviewer Homophily in Peer Review169 cited
  • 2016Peer Review Quality and Transparency of the Peer-Review Process in Open Access and Subscription Journals

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

166 cited
  • 2018NIH funding longevity by gender151 cited
  • Cited by

    • 2023The academic status of reviewers predicts their language use14 cited
    • 2024Textual features of peer review predict top-cited papers: An interpretable machine learning perspective13 cited
    • 2024Are the confidence scores of reviewers consistent with the review content? Evidence from top conference proceedings in AI12 cited
    • 2023MOPRD: A multidisciplinary open peer review dataset11 cited