Dear Reviewer 2: Go F’ Yourself
Author : David A. M. Peterson Objectives The objective of this study was to empirically test the wide belief that Reviewer #2 is a uniquely poor reviewer. Metho...
Étiquette : Peer Review
Towards a typology of edited books and conference proceedings according to the applied peer-review procedures
Author : Iva Zlodi In the last years here is an increasing need to ensure a more objective and transparent evaluation of scientific research in the Humanities a...
Who reviews for predatory journals? A study on reviewer characteristics
Authors : Anna Severin, Michaela Strinzel, Matthias Egger, Marc Domingo, Tiago Barros Background While the characteristics of scholars who publish in predatory ...
Envisioning the scientific paper of the future
Authors : Natalie M. Sopinka, Laura E. Coristine, Maria C. DeRosa, Chelsea M. Rochman, Brian L. Owens, Steven J. Cooke Consider for a moment the rate of advance...
Peer review and preprint policies are unclear at most major journals
Authors : Thomas Klebel, Stefan Reichmann, Jessica Polka, Gary McDowell, Naomi Penfold, Samantha Hindle, Tony Ross-Hellauer Clear and findable publishing polici...
How Many Papers Should Scientists Be Reviewing? An Analysis Using Verified Peer Review Reports
Authors : Vincent Raoult The current peer review system is under stress from ever increasing numbers of publications, the proliferation of open-access journals ...
Peer Review of Research Data Submissions to ScholarsArchive@OSU: How can we improve the curation of research datasets to enhance reusability?
Authors : Clara Llebot, Steven Van Tuyl Objective Best practices such as the FAIR Principles (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, Reusability) were de...