1998. Peer review for journals as it stands today - Part 1. Science Communication 19(3) 181-211 - Part 2. Science Communication 19(4) 277-306.CAMPANARIO, J. M. (1998), Peer review for journals as it stands today - Part 1. Science Communication, 19 : 181-211....
1998. Peer review for journals as it stands today—Part 1. Sci Commun 19:181–211. Cicchetti DV. 1997. Referees, editors, and publication practices: Improving the reliability and usefulness of the peer review system. Sci Eng Ethics 3:51–62. Colborn T, Dumanoski D, ...
Campanario, J.M., 1998a: Peer Review for Journals as ItStands Today – Part I. Science Communication 19:181–211.Campanario, J.M., 1998a: Peer Review for Journals as ItStands Today – Part II. Science Communication 19:277–306.Ceci, S.J. / Peters, D., 1984: How Blind is Blind ...
Campanario JM (1998) Peer review for journals as it stands today-part 1. Sci Commun 19(3):181–211 CrossRef Cicchetti DV (1980) Reliability of reviews for the American psychologist: a biostatistical assessment of the data. Am Psychol 35(3):300–303 CrossRef Cicchetti DV (1991) The re...
ScienceOpen, as an open access discovery platform, is proud to play a part in these efforts. Our mission is to connect researchers, publishers, and institutions through the free exchange of ideas and information. With millions of articles, journals, and books available for free, we support the...
Peer review is the main function carried out by journals, and the fundamental pillar for the advancement of Science. However, it is the most difficult and conflictive task. Sorooshian and Parsia (2018) describe several cases of author frustration over poorly managed peer review. The opinion of...
PEERPublic Employees for Environmental Responsibility PEERPacific Earthquake Engineering Research(Center at University of California, Berkeley) PEERPhysician's Evaluation and Educational Review in Emergency Medicine PEERPartnership for European Environmental Research ...
as it already is in some journals, reviewers would inevitably be inclined to shy away from negative comments for fear of upsetting authors who are also their potential future referees. Either way, publishing would become a little bit less honest – and it would be science and scientists that ...
This study holds significant importance in the realm of language education as it seeks to unravel the combined impact of feedback-supported tasks and peer-work activities on learners’ engagement, self-esteem, and language growth. By addressing this gap in current research, the study provides valua...
Here are my “guidelines” for my students: Don’t willy-nilly go researching on the web. With low costs of dissemination, anybody can write anything online. Peer reviewed publications in journals on average have had at least one level of screening; they are not “correct”, or necessarily ...