The peer review process is the dominant system adopted in science to evaluate the quality of articles submitted for publication. Various social players are involved in this process, including authors, editors and reviewers. Much has been discussed about the need to improve the scientific quality of what is published. The main focus of these discussions has been the work of the authors. However, the editors and reviewers also fulfill an important role. In this opinion article, we discuss some proposals to improve the peer review system, emphasizing the role of reviewers and editors.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Should Biomedical Publishing Be “Opened Up”? Toward a Values-Based Peer-Review Process.Wendy Lipworth, Ian Kerridge, Stacy Carter & Miles Little - 2011 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 8 (3):267-280.
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.
Evidence for the Effectiveness of Peer Review.Robert H. Fletcher & Suzanne W. Fletcher - 1997 - Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1):35-50.
Using a Dialectical Scientific Brief in Peer Review.Arthur Stamps - 1997 - Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1):85-98.
Advances in Peer Review Research: An Introduction.Arthur E. Stamps - 1997 - Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1):3-10.
Referees, Editors, and Publication Practices: Improving the Reliability and Usefulness of the Peer Review System.Domenic V. Cicchetti - 1997 - Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1):51-62.
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.
Peer Review for Journals: Evidence on Quality Control, Fairness, and Innovation.J. Scott Armstrong - 1997 - Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1):63-84.
Proposed Codification of Ethicacy in the Publication Process.Jo Ann Carland, James W. Carland & Carroll D. Aby - 1992 - Journal of Business Ethics 11 (2):95 - 104.
A Kuhnian Critique of Psychometric Research on Peer Review.Carole J. Lee - 2012 - Philosophy of Science 79 (5):859-870.
Ethics of Field Research: Do Journals Set the Standard?Helene Marsh & Carole M. Eros - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (3):375-382.
Peer Reviewers Can Meet Journals’ Criteria for Authorship.Thomas Erren, Michael Erren & David Shaw - 2013 - British Medical Journal 346:f166.
The Principles and Practices of Peer Review.Ronald N. Kostoff - 1997 - Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1):19-34.
Added to index2011-05-10
Total downloads6 ( #550,724 of 2,153,858 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #398,274 of 2,153,858 )
How can I increase my downloads?