Review
Education & Educational Research
Ghada M. Awada, Nuwar Mawlawi Diab
Summary: This study compares the effectiveness of oral face-to-face peer review and written online peer review in improving the argumentative writing achievement of English as a foreign language (EFL) university learners. The results indicate that online peer review is more effective than face-to-face peer review in providing systematic feedback and helping students improve their writing ability. The study also highlights the importance of shifting the control of feedback from the teacher to students in argumentative writing classes.
COMPUTER ASSISTED LANGUAGE LEARNING
(2023)
Article
Multidisciplinary Sciences
Lisa Z. Scheifele, Nikolaos Tsotakos, Michael J. Wolyniak
Summary: The ability to analyze and interpret research data is crucial for the scientific process, and using preprint articles as a pedagogical tool can help students improve this skill. By comparing experts' cognitive approaches with their own, critiquing data, and identifying changes in papers, students gain diverse insights into data presentation, peer review, and scientific publishing. Analysis of preprint articles is a valuable tool for enhancing students' information literacy and understanding of the scientific process.
Editorial Material
Forestry
Evgenios Agathokleous
Summary: This paper is specifically written for students at higher institutions or graduates who have published their first paper in a legitimate scientific journal, as they may soon start receiving invitations to act as a referee. A senior editor shares nine main suggestions and discusses do's and don'ts for peer reviewers, providing critical information for early career reviewers.
JOURNAL OF FORESTRY RESEARCH
(2021)
Review
Chemistry, Medicinal
Nuria Acero, Teresa Ortega, Victoria Villagrasa, Gemma Leon, Dolores Munoz-Mingarro, Encarna Castillo, M. Eugenia Gonzalez-Rosende, Silvia Borras, Jose Luis Rios, Francisco Bosch-Morell, Isabel Martinez-Solis
Summary: The incidence and prevalence of age-related neurodegenerative dementias are increasing. Medicinal plants traditionally used for aging-related problems have potential therapeutic effects, but more research is needed to find better treatments. Current clinical and preclinical scientific information is available on 49 species used in traditional medicine for neurodegenerative dementias, but more studies are required.
PHYTOTHERAPY RESEARCH
(2023)
Review
Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications
Guangyao Zhang, Shenmeng Xu, Yao Sun, Chunlin Jiang, Xianwen Wang
Summary: Peer review is crucial in scholarly publishing, and review length can be an indicator of researchers' effort. Factors such as gender, country-level cultural backgrounds, and country-level economic backgrounds are significantly associated with review length. In addition, disciplines, English proficiency, publications, and verified reviews are also related to review length.
JOURNAL OF INFORMETRICS
(2022)
Article
Geosciences, Multidisciplinary
Nadine Borduas-Dedekind, Karen C. Short, Samuel P. Carlson
Summary: Journals with open-discussion forums, such as Earth System Science Data (ESSD), are suitable for peer review training for early career scientists. This article presents the authors' experiences in conducting peer review workshops using manuscripts submitted to ESSD from the perspectives of workshop instructor, student, and author, and provides recommendations for the structure of such workshops. The authors aim to promote the use of open-discussion forums, including ESSD, for educational purposes, as they offer mutual benefits to trainees, authors, reviewers, and editors.
EARTH SYSTEM SCIENCE DATA
(2023)
Article
Biology
David G. Pina, Ivan Buljan, Darko Hren, Ana Marusic
Summary: Research indicates that changes in the organization of peer review for proposals submitted to the European Union's Marie Curie programme had little impact on the outcome, with factors such as grant type or research area playing a more significant role.
Review
Management
Thomas Feliciani, Michael Morreau, Junwen Luo, Pablo Lucas, Kalpana Shankar
Summary: This study aims to explore how factors relating to grades and grading affect the correctness of choices made by review panels among submitted proposals, and identify interventions in panel design that can increase the correctness of choices. The results of the experiment indicate that increasing the number of grades used by panel members and giving panels a greater capacity for discriminating among proposals can improve the correctness of choices, while differences in grading standards among panel members do not significantly decrease correctness.
Review
Multidisciplinary Sciences
Akira Matsui, Emily Chen, Yunwen Wang, Emilio Ferrara
Summary: This study uses open data from nearly 5,000 PeerJ publications to investigate the impact of peer-reviewing process on acceptance timeline and contribution potential of manuscripts. Findings suggest that peer reviewers choosing to reveal their names might influence review sentiment. Additionally, a taxonomy of manuscript modifications during revision sheds light on the changes authors make based on peer reviewer feedback.
Article
Environmental Studies
Rebecca Abma-Schouten, Joey Gijbels, Wendy Reijmerink, Ingeborg Meijer
Summary: Through an observational study, this research examines how scientific quality and societal relevance are discussed in panel meetings of two large biomedical and health research funders in the Netherlands. The study finds that scientific arguments are more prevalent than arguments related to societal relevance and expected impact. Diverse panels contribute to a wider range of arguments, particularly regarding societal relevance and impact. The research also addresses the need for funders to establish a shared conceptual framework to improve the quality of peer review.
SCIENCE AND PUBLIC POLICY
(2023)
Review
Obstetrics & Gynecology
Adina R. Kern-Goldberger, Richard James, Vincenzo Berghella, Emily S. Miller
Summary: This systematic review explores the impact of double-blind vs single-blind peer review on publication rates by perceived author gender. The results show mixed findings, but there is reasonable evidence suggesting the existence of gender bias in scientific publishing and the potential for double-blind review to mitigate its impact. It is important to further evaluate the processes in place to create unbiased evidence in fields with a majority of female professionals, such as obstetrics and gynecology.
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY
(2022)
Article
Environmental Sciences
Bo Maxwell Stevens, Randi Reppen, Mark Linhart, Kara Gibson, Adrah Parafiniuk, Aradhana Roberts, Robert Sanford, Nancy Collins Johnson
Summary: Social, political, and economic forces can unintentionally influence the stance of scientific literature, particularly in controversial topics like genetically modified crops. Research found that 40% of articles on GM crops had a positive or negative stance, with various factors affecting the proportion of positive and negative stances. Articles with a negative stance were more common in certain countries and at the beginning of the millennium.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS
(2021)
Review
Clinical Neurology
Kenny Chiu, David M. Clark, Eleanor Leigh
Summary: This study systematically reviewed and meta-analyzed the bidirectional relationship between peer functioning and social anxiety during adolescence. The findings showed a significant bidirectional association with social anxiety across three dimensions of peer functioning, supporting the hypothesis that peer functioning and social anxiety influence each other.
JOURNAL OF AFFECTIVE DISORDERS
(2021)
Editorial Material
Medicine, General & Internal
John P. A. Ioannidis, Michael Berkwits, Annette Flanagin, Fiona Godlee, Theodora Bloom
Summary: Encouraging the sharing of experiences and insights in peer review, publication, and scientific research conduct.
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL
(2021)
Review
Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications
Chunli Wei, Jingyi Zhao, Jue Ni, Jiang Li
Summary: This study examined the impact of open peer review (OPR) on the usage and citations of scientific articles using a dataset of 6441 articles published in six Public Library of Science (PLoS) journals in 2020-2021. OPR was found to have a positive association with higher article page views, saving, sharing, and HTML to PDF conversion rate; however, OPR articles had a lower PDF to citations conversion rate compared to non-OPR articles. The effects of OPR on citations varied across different citation databases. These findings provide compelling evidence to promote the adoption of OPR in scientific publishing and highlight the importance of careful selection of bibliographic databases when assessing its impact on article citations.
Article
Ethics
Stephen A. Gallo, Michael Lemaster, Scott R. Glisson
SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS
(2016)
Article
Multidisciplinary Sciences
Stephen A. Gallo, Joanne H. Sullivan, Scott R. Glisson
Review
Multidisciplinary Sciences
Stephen A. Gallo, Afton S. Carpenter, Scott R. Glisson
Article
Multidisciplinary Sciences
Stephen A. Gallo, Afton S. Carpenter, David Irwin, Caitlin D. McPartland, Joseph Travis, Sofie Reynders, Lisa A. Thompson, Scott R. Glisson
Article
Ethics
Stephen A. Gallo, Lisa A. Thompson, Karen B. Schmaling, Scott R. Glisson
SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS
(2020)
Review
Ethics
Stephen A. Gallo, Karen B. Schmaling, Lisa A. Thompson, Scott R. Glisson
Summary: The majority of applicants found peer review feedback to be fair, well-written, and well-informed. Women preferred the feedback's writing style more than men, and more white applicants found the feedback to be fair compared to non-white applicants. However, less than 40% of applicants found the feedback very useful for guiding their research and improving their grant applications.
SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS
(2021)
Review
Biology
Stephen A. Gallo, Joanne H. Sullivan, Dajoie R. Croslan
Summary: This study examined the participation of MSI-based scientists in grant reviews and found a lower rate compared to TWI-based scientists. Barriers identified by MSI-based scientists included lack of invitations and limited time. However, the majority of respondents expressed interest in reviewing and receiving training.
Article
Biology
Stephen A. Gallo, James M. Verdier, Scott L. Collins
Article
Multidisciplinary Sciences
Stephen A. Gallo, Karen B. Schmaling
Summary: In peer review, the evaluation of research proposal risks is a stronger predictor of scores than the evaluation of proposal strengths. Reviewer scoring leniency predicts overall and criteria scores. The interpretation of proposal risks contributes to reviewer scoring variability.
Review
Ethics
Karen B. Schmaling, Stephen A. Gallo
Summary: This study conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate gender differences in grant applications and outcomes in the sciences. The findings suggest that men have higher reapplication award acceptance rates, while women receive smaller award amounts and fewer awards.
RESEARCH INTEGRITY AND PEER REVIEW
(2023)
Article
Ethics
Stephen A. Gallo, Karen B. Schmaling, Lisa A. Thompson, Scott R. Glisson
RESEARCH INTEGRITY AND PEER REVIEW
(2020)
Article
Biochemistry & Molecular Biology
Stephen A. Gallo, Wei Wang, Satinder S. Rawat, Grace Jung, Alan J. Waring, Alexander M. Cole, Hong Lu, Xuxia Yan, Norelle L. Daly, David J. Craik, Shibo Jiang, Robert I. Lehrer, Robert Blumenthal
JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
(2006)
Article
Biochemistry & Molecular Biology
Satinder Singh Rawat, Mathias Viard, Stephen A. Gallo, Robert Blumenthal, Anu Puri
GLYCOCONJUGATE JOURNAL
(2006)
Article
Information Science & Library Science
Shreya Chandrasekharan, Mariam Zaka, Stephen Gallo, Wenxi Zhao, Dmitriy Korobskiy, Tandy Warnow, George Chacko
Summary: The researchers introduced a new method to analyze scientific communities and found that certain authors may represent valid communities of practice. The study revealed that popular domain-independent criteria for graphical cluster quality must be carefully interpreted in the context of searching for author communities, highlighting the role of contextual criteria.
QUANTITATIVE SCIENCE STUDIES
(2021)