Abuse of peer review process by sham authors
نویسندگان
چکیده
منابع مشابه
Sham peer review: perversions of a powerful process.
Of course, from childhood to forever, we are always thought to love reading. It is not only reading the lesson book but also reading everything good is the choice of getting new inspirations. Religion, sciences, politics, social, literature, and fictions will enrich you for not only one aspect. Having more aspects to know and understand will lead you become someone more precious. Yea, becoming ...
متن کاملthe impact of peer review on efl reviewers writing proficiency
امروزه تصحیح همکلاسی در کلاسهای نگارش یکی از اجزاء لاینفک کلاسهای دانش آموز محور است. تاثیرات مفید تصحیح همکلاسی بر زبان آموزان، معلمان را متقاعد کرده است که علیرغم صرف زمان، انرژی و توان بسیار، از این شیوه ی آموزشی در کلاسهای آموزش نگارش بهره بگیرند. تحقیق حاضر بر آن است تا با مقایسه دو گروه از یادگیرندگان زبان انگلیسی، تاثیر تصحیح همکلاسی را بر توانایی نوشتاری آنها نشان دهد. 122 خانم زبان آمو...
15 صفحه اولSo what is a sham peer review?
One of the first notable sham peer reviews took place in Oregon in the early 1980s. The physician who took it up with the courts was Dr. Patrick, and the Supreme Court ruled in his favor. As a result of the publicity surrounding this case, the Healthcare Quality Improvement Act (HCQIA) was enacted in 1986. One of the concerns that arose from the Patrick case was a fear that no physician would w...
متن کاملThe peer-review process.
Most authors experience that “sinking feeling” when reviewers’ comments and recommendations lead to rejection of a manuscript or the need for multiple revisions. It is important to bear in mind that this happens to most, if not all, scientists. Many times the reviewer or editor is correct, and with suitable revision, a better paper is ultimately published. Sometimes it is not. The author can th...
متن کاملThe peer-review process
The peer review process has been discussed at length in most of the established texts on the scholarly communication process, such as Ziman (1968), Ravetz (1973) and Meadows (1974). These authors agree that the four main functions of the scholarly literature are dissemination of current knowledge, archiving of the canonical knowledge base, quality control of published information, and assignmen...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
ژورنال
عنوان ژورنال: European Science Editing
سال: 2020
ISSN: 2518-3354
DOI: 10.3897/ese.2020.e53890