Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Bias in Peer Review.Carole J. Lee, Cassidy R. Sugimoto, Guo Zhang & Blaise Cronin - 2013 - Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 64 (1):2-17.
    Research on bias in peer review examines scholarly communication and funding processes to assess the epistemic and social legitimacy of the mechanisms by which knowledge communities vet and self-regulate their work. Despite vocal concerns, a closer look at the empirical and methodological limitations of research on bias raises questions about the existence and extent of many hypothesized forms of bias. In addition, the notion of bias is predicated on an implicit ideal that, once articulated, raises questions about the normative implications (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   60 citations  
  • Shifting Power Relations and the Ethics of Journal Peer Review.Ian Kerridge & Wendy Lipworth - 2011 - Social Epistemology 25 (1):97-121.
    Peer review of manuscripts has recently become a subject of academic research and ethical debate. Critics of the review process argue that it is a means by which powerful members of the scientific community maintain their power, and achieve their personal and communal aspirations, often at others' expense. This qualitative study aimed to generate a rich, empirically‐grounded understanding of the process of manuscript review, with a view to informing strategies to improve the review process. Open‐ended interviews were carried out with (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Perceptions of ethical problems with scientific journal Peer review: An exploratory study.David B. Resnik, Christina Gutierrez-Ford & Shyamal Peddada - 2008 - Science and Engineering Ethics 14 (3):305-310.
    This article reports the results of an anonymous survey of researchers at a government research institution concerning their perceptions about ethical problems with journal peer review. Incompetent review was the most common ethical problem reported by the respondents, with 61.8% (SE = 3.3%) claiming to have experienced this at some point during peer review. Bias (50.5%, SE = 3.4%) was the next most common problem. About 22.7% (SE = 2.8%) of respondents said that a reviewer had required them to include (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Experience with NIH Peer Review: Researchers' Cynicism and Desire for Change. [REVIEW]George M. Kurzon, Daryl E. Chubin & Gilbert W. Gillespie - 1985 - Science, Technology and Human Values 10 (3):44-54.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations