Science and Peer Review: The Canadian Standard-Setting Experience [Book Review]

Science, Technology and Human Values 10 (4):37-45 (1985)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)

Categories

Add categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1177/016224398501000404

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,471

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

The principles and practices of Peer review.Ronald N. Kostoff - 1997 - Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1):19-34.
Commensuration Bias in Peer Review.Carole J. Lee - 2015 - Philosophy of Science 82 (5):1272-1283,.
Due Process and Standard-setting: An Analysis of Due Process in Three Canadian Accounting and Auditing Standard-setting Bodies.Alan Richardson - 2008 - Journal of Business Ethics 81 (3):679-696.
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.
The Ups and Downs of Peer Review: Making Funding Choices for Science.Franz A. Foltz - 2000 - Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society 20 (6):427-440.
Advances in peer review research: an introduction.Arthur E. Stamps Iii - 1997 - Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1):3-10.
Peer review and publication: Lessons for lawyers.Susan Haack - 2007 - Stetson Law Review 36 (3).
Using a dialectical scientific brief in peer review.Arthur Stamps - 1997 - Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1):85-98.
Is Peer Review a Good Idea?Remco Heesen & Liam Kofi Bright - 2021 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 72 (3):635-663.
Peer Review: A Critical Inquiry.David Shatz - 2004 - Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Peer Review and Scholarly Originality: Let 1,000 Flowers Bloom, but Don’t Step on Any.David Strang & Kyle Siler - 2017 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 42 (1):29-61.
Peer review: Selecting the best science. [REVIEW]Wendy Baldwin & Belinda Seto - 1997 - Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1):11-17.
A Method for Improving the Integrity of Peer Review.Mehdi Dadkhah, Mohsen Kahani & Glenn Borchardt - 2018 - Science and Engineering Ethics 24 (5):1603-1610.
A review on a peer review.Andrej Poleev - 2016 - Enzymes 14.
The ethics of peer review in bioethics.David Wendler & Franklin Miller - 2014 - Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (10):697-701.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-11-27

Downloads
5 (#1,546,680)

6 months
4 (#799,256)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Buckets of Resistance: Standards and the Effectiveness of Citizen Science.Gwen Ottinger - 2010 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 35 (2):244-270.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The Resolution of Technically Intensive Public Policy Disputes.Harvey Brooks - 1984 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 9 (1):39-50.

Add more references