- Home
- Publications
- Publication Search
- Publication Details
Title
Emerging trends in peer review—a survey
Authors
Keywords
-
Journal
Frontiers in Neuroscience
Volume 9, Issue -, Pages -
Publisher
Frontiers Media SA
Online
2015-05-27
DOI
10.3389/fnins.2015.00169
References
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Related references
Note: Only part of the references are listed.- Use of double-blind peer review to increase author diversity
- (2014) E. S. Darling CONSERVATION BIOLOGY
- Retraction Note to: Stimulus-triggered fate conversion of somatic cells into pluripotency
- (2014) Haruko Obokata et al. NATURE
- Testing the Rebound Peer Review Concept
- (2013) Stefan W. Ryter et al. ANTIOXIDANTS & REDOX SIGNALING
- Company offers portable peer review
- (2013) Richard Van Noorden NATURE
- Blind stock-taking
- (2013) Nature Climate Change
- The eLife approach to peer review
- (2013) Randy Schekman et al. eLife
- Anatomy of open access publishing: a study of longitudinal development and internal structure
- (2012) Mikael Laakso et al. BMC Medicine
- Is expert peer review obsolete? A model suggests that post-publication reader review may exceed the accuracy of traditional peer review
- (2012) Daniel M. Herron SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES
- An emerging consensus for open evaluation: 18 visions for the future of scientific publishing
- (2012) Nikolaus Kriegeskorte et al. Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
- Open Evaluation: A Vision for Entirely Transparent Post-Publication Peer Review and Rating for Science
- (2012) Nikolaus Kriegeskorte Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
- Multi-Stage Open Peer Review: Scientific Evaluation Integrating the Strengths of Traditional Peer Review with the Virtues of Transparency and Self-Regulation
- (2012) Ulrich Pöschl Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
- Rebound Peer Review: A Viable Recourse for Aggrieved Authors?
- (2011) Chandan K. Sen ANTIOXIDANTS & REDOX SIGNALING
- Believe it or not: how much can we rely on published data on potential drug targets?
- (2011) Florian Prinz et al. NATURE REVIEWS DRUG DISCOVERY
- Testing for the Presence of Positive-Outcome Bias in Peer Review
- (2010) Gwendolyn B. Emerson et al. ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
- Editorial Peer Reviewers' Recommendations at a General Medical Journal: Are They Reliable and Do Editors Care?
- (2010) Richard L. Kravitz et al. PLoS One
- Rejecting and resisting Nobel class discoveries: accounts by Nobel Laureates
- (2009) Juan Miguel Campanario SCIENTOMETRICS
- Does double-blind review benefit female authors?
- (2008) Thomas J. Webb et al. TRENDS IN ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION
- Double-blind review favours increased representation of female authors
- (2007) A BUDDEN et al. TRENDS IN ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION
Create your own webinar
Interested in hosting your own webinar? Check the schedule and propose your idea to the Peeref Content Team.
Create NowAsk a Question. Answer a Question.
Quickly pose questions to the entire community. Debate answers and get clarity on the most important issues facing researchers.
Get Started