- Peer review: An unflattering picture.Kenneth M. Adams - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):135-136.details
|
|
The predictive validity of peer review: A neglected issue.Robert F. Bornstein - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):138-139.details
|
|
When nonreliability of reviews indicates solid science.Douglas Lee Eckberg - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):145-146.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 unreliability in peer review harmful?Henry L. Roediger - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):159-160.details
|
|
Some indices of the reliability of peer review.Robert Rosenthal - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):160-161.details
|
|
In praise of randomness.Peter H. Schönemann - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):162-163.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
|
|
Reliability, bias, or quality: What is the issue?Katherine Nelson - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):229-229.details
|
|
What is the source of bias in peer review?Ray Over - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):229-230.details
|
|
Peer review in the physical sciences: An editor's view.William M. Honig - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):216-217.details
|
|
When will the editors start to edit?Leonard D. Goodstein - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):212-213.details
|
|
Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again.Douglas P. Peters & Stephen J. Ceci - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):187-255.details
|
|
Referee report on an earlier draft of Peters and Ceci's target article.William A. Scott - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):238-238.details
|
|
Experimenter and reviewer bias.Joseph C. Witt & Michael J. Hannafin - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):243-244.details
|
|
Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again.Douglas P. Peters & Stephen J. Ceci - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):187-195.details
|
|
Reflections from the peer review mirror.Domenic V. Cicchetti - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):167-186.details
|
|
The process of peer review: Unanswered questions.Linda D. Nelson - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):158-159.details
|
|
Reliability, fairness, objectivity and other inappropriate goals in peer review.John C. Bailar - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):137-138.details
|
|
On forecasting validity and finessing reliability.J. Barnard Gilmore - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):148-149.details
|
|
Interreferee agreement and acceptance rates in physics.David Lazarus - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):219-219.details
|
|
The insufficiencies of methodological inadequacy.Robert Hogan - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):216-216.details
|
|
Peer reviewing: Improve or be rejected.Michael J. A. Howe - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):218-219.details
|
|
Barriers to scientific contributions: The author's formula.J. Scott Armstrong - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):197-199.details
|
|
Rejection, rebuttal, revision: Some flexible features of peer review.Donald B. Rubin - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):236-237.details
|
|
Confusion between reviewer reliability and wise editorial and funding decisions.Charles A. Kiesler - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):151-152.details
|
|
Should the blinded lead the blinded?Stephen P. Lock - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):156-157.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
|
|
Validating research performance metrics against peer rankings.Stevan Harnad - 2008 - Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics 8 (1):103-107.details
|
|
Do we really want more “reliable” reviewers?Helena Chmura Kraemer - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):152-154.details
|
|
Why is the reliability of peer review so low?Donald Laming - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):154-156.details
|
|
Reviewer reliability: Confusing random error with systematic error or bias.Stanley Presser - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):234-235.details
|
|
Research on research evaluation.Sven Hemlin - 1996 - Social Epistemology 10 (2):209 – 250.details
|
|
Manuscript evaluation by journal referees and editors: Randomness or bias?Andrew M. Colman - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):205-206.details
|
|
Authorship and manuscript reviewing: The risk of bias.Lois DeBakey - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):208-209.details
|
|
Optional published refereeing.R. A. Gordon - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):213-214.details
|
|
Journal availability and the quality of published research.Jack M. Fletcher - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):146-147.details
|
|
Theoretical implications of failure to detect prepublished submissions.Douglas Lee Eckberg - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):209-210.details
|
|
Computer-assisted referee selection as a means of reducing potential editorial bias.H. Russell Bernard - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):202-202.details
|
|
Research on peer-review practices: Problems of interpretation, application, and propriety.William A. Wilson - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):242-243.details
|
|
Competency testing for reviewers and editors.Rosalyn S. Yalow - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):244-245.details
|
|
Toward openness and fairness in the review process.Byron P. Rourke - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):161-161.details
|
|
On peer review: “We have met the enemy and he is us”.Domenic V. Cicchetti - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):205-205.details
|
|
2004: A scenario of peer review in the future.Alan L. Porter - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):233-234.details
|
|
Does group discussion contribute reliability of complex judgments?Patricia Cohen - 1991 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14 (1):139-140.details
|
|
The journal article review process as a game of chance.Norval D. Glenn - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):211-212.details
|
|
Peer review: A philosophically faulty concept which is proving disastrous for science.David F. Horrobin - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):217-218.details
|
|
Publication, politics, and scientific progress.Michael J. Mahoney - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):220-221.details
|
|
Editorial responsibilities in manuscript review.Rick Crandall - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):207-208.details
|
|
Reviewer “bias”: Do Peters and Ceci protest too much?Daniel Perlman - 1982 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5 (2):231-232.details
|
|