- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
How peer-review constrains cognition: on the frontline in the knowledge sector
Frontiers in Psychology 6 (2015)
Abstract
This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)Links
PhilArchive
External links
(no proxy)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Through your library
- Sign in / register and customize your OpenURL resolver
- Configure custom resolver
My notes
Similar books and articles
Appendix. Comparing peer review and information prizes: A possible economics experiment.Robin Hanson - 1995 - Social Epistemology 9 (1):49-55.
The principles and practices of Peer review.Ronald N. Kostoff - 1997 - Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1):19-34.
What We Owe the Author: rethinking editorial peer review.N. J. Crigger - 1998 - Nursing Ethics 5 (5):451-457.
Review of the Ethics and Etiquettes of Time Management of Manuscript Peer Review. [REVIEW]Malhar N. Kumar - 2014 - Journal of Academic Ethics 12 (4):333-346.
Peer-to-peer Review and the Future of Scholarly Authority.Kathleen Fitzpatrick - 2010 - Social Epistemology 24 (3):161-179.
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.
Explanation constrains learning, and prior knowledge constrains explanation.Joseph Jay Williams & Tania Lombrozo - 2010 - In S. Ohlsson & R. Catrambone (eds.), Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Cognitive Science Society.
Promoting F.A.I.T.h. In Peer review: Five core attributes of effective Peer review. [REVIEW]Leigh Turner - 2003 - Journal of Academic Ethics 1 (2):181-188.
The Principles of Fair Allocation of Peer-Review: How Much Should a Researcher be Expected to Contribute?José G. B. Derraik - 2015 - Science and Engineering Ethics 21 (4):825-828.
Social Biases and Solution for Procedural Objectivity.Carole J. Lee & Christian D. Schunn - 2011 - Hypatia 26 (2):352-73.
Peer-to-Peer Semantic Search Engine.Tomáš Havryluk & Ivan Jelínek - 2007 - Communication and Cognition: An Interdisciplinary Quarterly Journal 40 (3):215.
Analytics
Added to PP
2016-06-30
Downloads
23 (#681,424)
6 months
15 (#166,852)
2016-06-30
Downloads
23 (#681,424)
6 months
15 (#166,852)
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
“The Grievance Studies Affair” Project: Reconstructing and Assessing the Experimental Design.Mikko Lagerspetz - 2021 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 46 (2):402-424.
Autonomous technologies in human ecologies: enlanguaged cognition, practices and technology.Rasmus Gahrn-Andersen & Stephen J. Cowley - 2022 - AI and Society 37 (2):687-699.
References found in this work
Science in action: how to follow scientists and engineers through society.Bruno Latour - 1987 - Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
The new production of knowledge: the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies.Michael Gibbons (ed.) - 1994 - Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE Publications.
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-64dd777598-wg6s5 uwo