- Different rates of agreement on acceptance and rejection: A statistical artifact?Marilyn E. Demorest - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):144-145.details
|
|
Peer review: Explicit criteria and training can help.Fred Delcomyn - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):144-144.details
|
|
What should be done improve reviewing?Rick Crandall - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):143-143.details
|
|
Evaluating scholarly works: How many reviewers? How much anonymity?John D. Cone - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):142-142.details
|
|
Unreliable peer review: Causes and cures of human misery.Andrew M. Colman - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):141-142.details
|
|
Consensus and the reliability of peer-review evaluations.Stephen Cole - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):140-141.details
|
|
Does group discussion contribute reliability of complex judgments?Patricia Cohen - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):139-140.details
|
|
The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigation.Domenic V. Cicchetti - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):119-135.details
|
|
Reflections from the peer review mirror.Domenic V. Cicchetti - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):167-186.details
|
|
Epistemic Consequences of Bibliometrics-based Evaluation: Insights from the Scientific Community.Tommaso Castellani, Emanuele Pontecorvo & Adriana Valente - 2016 - Social Epistemology 30 (4):398-419.details
|
|
The predictive validity of peer review: A neglected issue.Robert F. Bornstein - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):138-139.details
|
|
Reliability, fairness, objectivity and other inappropriate goals in peer review.John C. Bailar - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):137-138.details
|
|
Peer review for journals: Evidence on quality control, fairness, and innovation.J. Scott Armstrong - 1997 - Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1):63-84.details
|
|
Does the need for agreement among reviewers inhibit the publication controversial findings?J. Scott Armstrong & Raymond Hubbard - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):136-137.details
|
|
Peer review: An unflattering picture.Kenneth M. Adams - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):135-136.details
|
|
Replication, reliability and peer review: A case study.Michael E. Gorman - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):149-149.details
|
|
“The Grievance Studies Affair” Project: Reconstructing and Assessing the Experimental Design.Mikko Lagerspetz - 2021 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 46 (2):402-424.details
|
|
The Obligation of Intellectuals.William M. Epstein - 1990 - Science, Technology and Human Values 15 (2):244-247.details
|
|
Why is the reliability of peer review so low?Donald Laming - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):154-156.details
|
|
Justice, efficiency and epistemology in the peer review of scientific manuscripts.Michael J. Mahoney - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):157-157.details
|
|
Should the blinded lead the blinded?Stephen P. Lock - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):156-157.details
|
|
Some indices of the reliability of peer review.Robert Rosenthal - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):160-161.details
|
|
Now that we know how low the reliability is, what shall we do?Kurt Salzinger - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):162-162.details
|
|
Confusion between reviewer reliability and wise editorial and funding decisions.Charles A. Kiesler - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):151-152.details
|
|
Peer review is not enough: Editors must work with librarians to ensure access to research.Steve Fuller - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):147-148.details
|
|
Is there an alternative to peer review?Richard Greene - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):149-150.details
|
|
Do we really want more “reliable” reviewers?Helena Chmura Kraemer - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):152-154.details
|
|
In praise of randomness.Peter H. Schönemann - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):162-163.details
|
|
Chairman's action: The importance of executive decisions in peer review.Peter Tyrer - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):164-165.details
|
|
Is unreliability in peer review harmful?Henry L. Roediger - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):159-160.details
|
|
The Lighter Side of Deception Research in the Social Sciences: Social Work as Comedy.William Epstein - 2006 - Journal of Information Ethics 15 (1):11-26.details
|
|
Disagreement among journal reviewers: No cause for undue alarm.Lawrence J. Stricker - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):163-164.details
|
|
What to do about peer review: Is the cure worse than the disease?Thomas R. Zentall - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):166-167.details
|
|
Guerra de las ciencias y la pugna por la razón: a veinticinco años del escándalo Sokal.Christian Escobar-Jiménez - 2022 - Arbor 198 (806):a682.details
|
|
The Sokal Affair in Context.Stephen Hilgartner - 1997 - Science, Technology and Human Values 22 (4):506-522.details
|
|
Journal availability and the quality of published research.Jack M. Fletcher - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):146-147.details
|
|
Referee agreement in context.Lowell L. Hargens - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):150-151.details
|
|
When nonreliability of reviews indicates solid science.Douglas Lee Eckberg - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):145-146.details
|
|
On forecasting validity and finessing reliability.J. Barnard Gilmore - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):148-149.details
|
|
Toward openness and fairness in the review process.Byron P. Rourke - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):161-161.details
|
|
Who's a Captive? Who's a Victim? Response to Collins's Method Talk.Pam Scott, Evelleen Richards & Brian Martin - 1991 - Science, Technology and Human Values 16 (2):252-255.details
|
|
Reflections on the peer review process.Herbert W. Marsh & Samuel Ball - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):157-158.details
|
|
Do peer reviewers really agree more on rejections than acceptances? A random-agreement benchmark says they do not.Gerald S. Wasserman - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):165-166.details
|
|
The process of peer review: Unanswered questions.Linda D. Nelson - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):158-159.details
|
|