Impartial judgment by the "gatekeepers" of science: fallibility and accountability in the peer review process.
about
Do author-suggested reviewers rate submissions more favorably than editor-suggested reviewers? A study on atmospheric chemistry and physicsBias in dissemination of clinical research findings: structured OPEN framework of what, who and why, based on literature review and expert consensusPeer review and the publication processMechanism change in a simulation of peer review: from junk support to elitismDesigning next-generation platforms for evaluating scientific output: what scientists can learn from the social webEditorial peer reviewers' recommendations at a general medical journal: are they reliable and do editors care?Quality control of epidemiological lectures online: scientific evaluation of peer reviewThe ups and downs of peer review.Effects of reviewers' gender on assessments of a gender-related standardized manuscript.How international is Medical Education?Managing scientific uncertainty in health legislation.Advancing kinesiology through improved peer review.Safeguarding the integrity of science communication by restraining 'rational cheating' in peer reviewThe Peer-Review and Editorial System: Ways to Fix Something That Might Be Broken.Editorial behaviors in peer review.Publication patterns in developmental psychology: Trends and social networks.Is peer review censorship?Short, Sweet, and Problematic? The Rise of the Short Report in Psychological Science.A Writers Dilemma: Where to Publish and Where not to?Time for Revelation: Unmasking the Anonymity of Blind Reviewers.Perspectives from early career researchers on the publication process in ecology - a response to Statzner & Resh (2010)An Examination of Gender Differences in the American Fisheries Society Peer-Review ProcessA concept for inferring ‘frontier research’ in grant proposalsEditors' perspectives on the peer-review process in biomedical journals: protocol for a qualitative studyShould Biomedical Publishing Be “Opened Up”? Toward a Values-Based Peer-Review ProcessGender practices in the construction of academic excellence: Sheep with five legs
P2860
Q21091101-4C6C97A8-9D2F-40E3-859B-E4D94159FF16Q28074141-7358603A-B3F5-425D-91A8-33AFF783A42EQ28076160-FE81B0AB-B22B-4785-A8E8-78CEB56617D8Q28657604-2A28F71F-9F6A-458C-B2B2-1DE466E5F06BQ28727376-F97EF1D4-8595-458A-8865-A0E1FBD9445EQ28752655-1DCFFA49-36C6-4AD8-9187-9C1D8DD57F14Q28760685-EE7BF385-291D-498C-A58A-B385ABE4D5AAQ34636617-26E7D799-1EF7-431A-836E-6F1BAE3A9AD0Q35175503-25DD5C21-799B-46FC-8FF5-67898B64CCC6Q35666598-12664266-AA41-4349-9C94-90FF1D035BBCQ36710362-04ECAD41-0B2D-4499-85D0-63E91EE21B1DQ38237401-4357A641-0513-41E3-9259-1F5A3372DEEDQ38269477-C5C322BC-89D7-4BF7-9F97-5CA0FA68F3EDQ38544408-1CDBD4A8-721E-4E02-9D1E-7C1D7BE38C77Q38888604-EC5DFF76-7512-4157-8FBF-BCC67C236EE0Q40599404-50DF956D-5B8C-441F-919D-B27EBEAD36C7Q43153388-7CA68A0F-4E27-479E-AEE3-7B7766C9E211Q46484571-2A3FE107-AFCE-4739-B1B4-B6C69A7A6E03Q47581374-812B93A5-3061-4D5F-A989-C80FF809F26BQ53128584-3CE6460E-AA38-4527-AEB6-AD7E098B39BCQ56933782-3142F79A-13FE-4C88-8CB3-EED93FF78502Q57063804-8FE778F5-540B-403C-AF8F-CAB6EA6F015DQ57742818-3F0FA96C-7D5C-4476-9A72-6EB8F76820E3Q57812103-95EFBFB8-C8BA-46F3-89D0-E9716974424AQ57828500-509B028A-2C84-44E9-88FB-C1CEA1FD546EQ58162843-44F8A6E1-01FD-4D3C-B099-C1C3F71C3988
P2860
Impartial judgment by the "gatekeepers" of science: fallibility and accountability in the peer review process.
description
2003 nî lūn-bûn
@nan
2003 թուականի Յունուարին հրատարակուած գիտական յօդուած
@hyw
2003 թվականի հունվարին հրատարակված գիտական հոդված
@hy
2003年の論文
@ja
2003年論文
@yue
2003年論文
@zh-hant
2003年論文
@zh-hk
2003年論文
@zh-mo
2003年論文
@zh-tw
2003年论文
@wuu
name
Impartial judgment by the "gat ...... ty in the peer review process.
@ast
Impartial judgment by the "gat ...... ty in the peer review process.
@en
type
label
Impartial judgment by the "gat ...... ty in the peer review process.
@ast
Impartial judgment by the "gat ...... ty in the peer review process.
@en
prefLabel
Impartial judgment by the "gat ...... ty in the peer review process.
@ast
Impartial judgment by the "gat ...... ty in the peer review process.
@en
P2093
P356
P1476
Impartial judgment by the "gat ...... ty in the peer review process.
@en
P2093
Addeane S Caelleigh
Joseph S Gonnella
Mohammadreza Hojat
P2888
P356
10.1023/A:1022670432373
P577
2003-01-01T00:00:00Z
P6179
1052442494