Reviewing reviewers

نویسندگان

چکیده

برای دانلود باید عضویت طلایی داشته باشید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Last Words Reviewing the Reviewers

I just returned from the Association for Computational Linguistics’ 43rd Annual Meeting (ACL-2005). The acceptance rate was 18%. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? When the acceptance rate is low, precision tends to be high. The audience can judge precision for itself. If the presentations are good, everyone knows it. And if they aren’t, they know that as well. ACL-2005 had great precision. R...

متن کامل

Reviewing, Reviewers and the Scientific Enterprise

Despite their critical importance to the scientific enterprise, reviewers receive no formal training and reviewing has become a skill that they pick up through trial and error. Additionally, because most reviewers do not receive any feedback on their performance, any bad reviewing habits become entrenched over time. This has contributed to significant and unnecessary anxiety about reviewing and...

متن کامل

Reviewing the reviewers: the vague accountability of research ethics committees

The role of research ethics committees (RECs) is currently strained by increases in the number of protocols that are in need of review, the scientific and funding complexities of the protocols, and a lack of clear standards for ethics assessment. This commentary describes the significance of these strains and calls for clarification of reviewer accountability. To maintain or, in many cases, to ...

متن کامل

Reviewing in science requires quality criteria and professional reviewers.

The use of peers to assess the work of scientists goes back to the 17th century and finally led to what we call peer review (Kronick, 1990) or review by competitors (Roy and Ashburn, 2001). Usually peers are external experts not paid for their assessment. Recent studies of the effectiveness and quality of our current peer review system are not reassuring (Godlee and Jefferson, 1999; Jefferson e...

متن کامل

Reviewing Scientific Manuscripts: A Comprehensive Guide for Peer Reviewers.

86 The abstract provides the authors with an opportunity to summarize the objectives, methods, 87 results and conclusions for the journal readers. It is oftentimes the first, and perhaps only, section 88 of the manuscript that will be read as it is typically freely available through reference databases. 89 The abstract should provide a clear statement of the study objectives, which must match w...

متن کامل

ذخیره 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: British Journal of Psychiatry

سال: 1990

ISSN: 0007-1250,1472-1465

DOI: 10.1192/s0007125000062656