Attitudes of referees in a multidisciplinary journal: An empirical analysis

The evolution of peer review as a basis for scientific publication: directional selection towards a robust discipline?

(2015) Catarina Ferreira et al.   BIOLOGICAL REVIEWS

Measuring the effectiveness of scientific gatekeeping

(2014) Kyle Siler et al.   PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

The reviewer in the mirror: examining gendered and ethnicized notions of reciprocity in peer review

(2014) Bradford Demarest et al.   SCIENTOMETRICS

The principal-agent problem in peer review

(2014) Jose A. García et al.   Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology

A SIMULATION OF DISAGREEMENT FOR CONTROL OF RATIONAL CHEATING IN PEER REVIEW

(2013) FRANCISCO GRIMALDO et al.   ADVANCES IN COMPLEX SYSTEMS

Secretive and Subjective, Peer Review Proves Resistant to Study

(2013) J. Couzin-Frankel   SCIENCE

How important tasks are performed: peer review

(2013) T. Hartonen et al.   Scientific Reports

Peer review in a changing world: An international study measuring the attitudes of researchers

(2012) Adrian Mulligan et al.   JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

Bias in peer review

(2012) Carole J. Lee et al.   JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

A Kuhnian Critique of Psychometric Research on Peer Review

(2012) Carole J. Lee   PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE

Misconduct Policies in High-Impact Biomedical Journals

(2012) Xavier Bosch et al.   PLoS One

Citation gamesmanship: testing for evidence of ego bias in peer review

(2012) Cassidy R. Sugimoto et al.   SCIENTOMETRICS

Addressing Scientific Fraud

(2011) J. Crocker et al.   SCIENCE

Editorial Peer Reviewers' Recommendations at a General Medical Journal: Are They Reliable and Do Editors Care?

(2010) Richard L. Kravitz et al.   PLoS One

Science journal editors' views on publication ethics: results of an international survey

(2009) E Wager et al.   JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS

A content analysis of referees’ comments: how do comments on manuscripts rejected by a high-impact journal and later published in either a low- or high-impact journal differ?

(2009) Lutz Bornmann et al.   SCIENTOMETRICS

The tragedy of the reviewer commons*

(2008) Michael E. Hochberg et al.   ECOLOGY LETTERS

Is multidisciplinary research more highly cited? A macrolevel study

(2008) Jonathan M. Levitt et al.   JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

Reviewing Peer Review

(2008) B. Alberts et al.   SCIENCE