SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Peer review: Problematic or promising?
10 references·0 citing·56 second hop
Peer review: Problematic or promising? (2023)Peer review: Problematic or promising?Reining in Reviewer Two: How to Uphold Epistemic Respect in Academia (2022)Reining in Reviewer Two: How …Improving equity, diversity, and inclusion in academia (2022)Improving equity, diversity, …Why Participate in Peer Review? (2021)Why Participate in Peer Revie…Pro-active peer review for premier journals (2021)Pro-active peer review for pr…Editorial Work and the Peer Review Economy of STS Journals (2021)Editorial Work and the Peer R…Dealing with inappropriate-, low-quality-, and other forms of challenging peer review, including hostile referees and inflammatory or confusing critiques: Prevention and treatment (2020)Dealing with inappropriate-, …The “invisible hand” of peer review: The implications of author-referee networks on peer review in a scholarly journal (2019)The “invisible hand” of peer …THE ROYAL SOCIETY AND THE PREHISTORY OF PEER REVIEW, 1665–1965 (2017)THE ROYAL SOCIETY AND THE PRE…The Manuscript Review Process (2003)The Manuscript Review ProcessCommentary on Arthur Bedeian’s “The Manuscript Review Process: The Proper Roles of Authors, Referees, and Editors” (2003)Commentary on Arthur Bedeian’…The sociology of science (1973)Barriers to the Advance of Organizational Science: Paradigm Development as a Dependent Variable (1993)GENERATING RESEARCH QUESTIONS THROUGH PROBLEMATIZATION. (2011)Scientific peer review (2011)Has Management Studies Lost Its Way? Ideas for More Imaginative and Innovative Research (2012)Publishing in the Organizational Sciences. (1986)The Rated Importance, Scientific Validity, and Practical Usefulness of Organizational Behavior Theories: A Quantitative Review (2003)Ring a Ring o’ Roses: Quality Journals and Gamesmanship in Management Studies* (2007)How Knowledge Validation Processes Affect Knowledge Contribution (2009)Evidence-Based Management and the Trustworthiness of Our Cumulative Scientific Knowledge: Implications for Teaching, Research, and Practice (2014)Patterns of evaluation in science: Institutionalisation, structure and functions of the referee system (1971)The Nature of the Book (1998)Bias in peer review (2012)A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review (2017)Ten Hot Topics around Scholarly Publishing (2019)The limitations to our understanding of peer review (2020)Who's Afraid of Peer Review? (2013)Academic Research in the 21st Century: Maintaining Scientific Integrity in a Climate of Perverse Incentives and Hypercompetition (2016)Early coauthorship with top scientists predicts success in academic careers (2019)Can we automate expert-based journal rankings? Analysis of the Finnish publication indicator (2020)AMA manual of style: a guide for authors and editors (2007)Ensuring the Quality, Fairness, and Integrity of Journal Peer Review: A Possible Role of Editors (2015)Unprofessional peer reviews disproportionately harm underrepresented groups in STEM (2019)Peer review experiences of academic chemists in Ph.D. granting institutions in the United States (2021)Applied linguistics journal editor perspectives: Research ethics and academic publishing (2023)Beyond the Review: The Editorial Duty to Uphold Professional Conduct (2025)Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again (1982)Open peer review: A randomised controlled trial (2000)Effect on peer review of telling reviewers that their signed reviews might be posted on the web: randomised controlled trial (2010)Now More Than Ever: Reflections on the State and Importance of Peer Review (2021)Challenges in peer review: how to guarantee the quality and transparency of the editorial process in scientific journals (2023)Los desafíos de la revisión por pares: cómo garantizar la calidad y transparencia del proceso editorial de las revistas científicas (2023)Effect of expectation and disconfirmation on postexposure product evaluations: An alternative interpretation. (1977)A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction Decisions (1980)MODES OF THEORIZING IN STRATEGIC HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: TESTS OF UNIVERSALISTIC, CONTINGENCY, AND CONFIGURATIONS. PERFORMANCE PREDICTIONS. (1996)Scientific procedures and rationales for systematic literature reviews (SPAR‐4‐SLR) (2021)Advancing knowledge through literature reviews: ‘what’, ‘why’, and ‘how to contribute’ (2022)How to combine and clean bibliometric data and use bibliometric tools synergistically: Guidelines using metaverse research (2024)Little Science, Big Science (1963)The Essential Tension (1977)Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts (1986)Scholarly Publishing, Boundary Processes, and the Problem of Fake Peer Reviews (2022)Open peer review urgently requires evidence: A call to action (2023)The Feeling Rules of Peer Review: Defining, Displaying, and Managing Emotions in Evaluation for Research Funding (2023)Long-term reduction in implicit race bias: A prejudice habit-breaking intervention (2012)Toward a Field of Intersectionality Studies: Theory, Applications, and Praxis (2013)The Diversity–Innovation Paradox in Science (2020)A Conceptual Approach to Transform and Enhance Academic Mentorship: Through Open Educational Practices (2023)Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion on Editorial Boards of Global Health Journals (2023)Gamification towards and alongside equity, diversity and inclusion: Looking back to move forward (2024)An Examination of the Reliability of Prestigious Scholarly Journals: Evidence and Implications for Decision‐Makers (2007)Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing (2009)Slowed canonical progress in large fields of science (2021)Science for sale? Why academic marketization is a problem and what sustainability research can do about it (2023)The importance of ABS 2 journals in finance scholarship: Evidence from a bibliometric case study (2023)Editorial: Navigating excellence: understanding and overcoming common causes of manuscript rejections in logistics and supply chain management research (2024)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2003The Manuscript Review Process179 cited
  • 2017THE ROYAL SOCIETY AND THE PREHISTORY OF PEER REVIEW, 1665–1965130 cited
  • 2022Improving equity, diversity, and inclusion in academia102 cited
  • 2019The “invisible hand” of peer review: The implications of author-referee networks on peer review in a scholarly journal48 cited
  • 2003Commentary on Arthur Bedeian’s “The Manuscript Review Process: The Proper Roles of Authors, Referees, and Editors”45 cited
  • 2021Why Participate in Peer Review?33 cited
  • 2022Reining in Reviewer Two: How to Uphold Epistemic Respect in Academia32 cited
  • 2021Pro-active peer review for premier journals31 cited
  • 2021Editorial Work and the Peer Review Economy of STS Journals30 cited
  • 2020Dealing with inappropriate-, low-quality-, and other forms of challenging peer review, including hostile referees and inflammatory or confusing critiques: Prevention and treatment10 cited

Cited by

No citing works inside the corpus for this window.

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