- 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
Peer review: types, pitfalls and controversies
Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 15 (1):9-15 (2024)
Abstract
Peer review has been adopted by most journals to evaluate the quality of submitted manuscripts, for which peer reviewers aim to provide a critical, independent and unbiased assessment. Peer review is ever evolving, with no single peer review system being perfect currently. This review article aims to give a broad overview of the various types of peer review, their advantages, pitfalls, and some related controversies.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
The tragedy of the common reviewers: the peer review process.Ulysses Paulino De Albuquerque - unknown
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 ethics of peer review in bioethics.David Wendler & Franklin Miller - 2014 - Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (10):697-701.
Promoting F.A.I.T.H. in Peer Review: Five Core Attributes of Effective Peer Review.Turner Leigh - 2003 - Journal of Academic Ethics 1 (2):181-188.
Peering, viewing and reviewing: What makes a Peer review good. Mohini & Sakir Ahmed - 2022 - Central Asian Journal of Medical Hypotheses and Ethics 3 (2):119-124.
Peer Review system: A Golden standard for publications process.Shamima Parvin Lasker - 2018 - Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 9 (1):13-23.
Death of a reviewer or death of peer review integrity? the challenges of using AI tools in peer reviewing and the need to go beyond publishing policies.Vasiliki Mollaki - 2024 - Research Ethics 20 (2):239-250.
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 review reduces spin in PCORI research reports.Mark Helfand, Kevin Naaman, Kelly J. Vander Ley, Avonne E. Connor, Meredith L. Phillips & Evan Mayo-Wilson - 2021 - Research Integrity and Peer Review 6 (1).
Analytics
Added to PP
2024-04-22
Downloads
0
6 months
0
2024-04-22
Downloads
0
6 months
0
Historical graph of downloads
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
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-68866f4b87-7qn45 uwo