标题
ChatGPT identifies gender disparities in scientific peer review
作者
关键词
-
出版物
eLife
Volume 12, Issue -, Pages -
出版商
eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd
发表日期
2023-11-04
DOI
10.7554/elife.90230.3
参考文献
相关参考文献
注意：仅列出部分参考文献，下载原文获取全部文献信息。- Double‐blind peer review affects reviewer ratings and editor decisions at an ecology journal
- (2023) Charles W. Fox et al. FUNCTIONAL ECOLOGY
- Peer review analyze: A novel benchmark resource for computational analysis of peer reviews
- (2022) Tirthankar Ghosal et al. PLoS One
- Collider Bias
- (2022) Mathias J. Holmberg et al. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
- Are Women Held to Higher Standards? Evidence from Peer Review
- (2022) Erin Hengel ECONOMIC JOURNAL
- Intraclass correlation – A discussion and demonstration of basic features
- (2019) David Liljequist et al. PLoS One
- “I don't see gender”: Conceptualizing a gendered system of academic publishing
- (2019) Jamie Lundine et al. SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE
- Sentiment analysis using deep learning architectures: a review
- (2019) Ashima Yadav et al. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE REVIEW
- Reviewer bias in single- versus double-blind peer review
- (2017) Andrew Tomkins et al. PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
- Advances in natural language processing
- (2015) J. Hirschberg et al. SCIENCE
- Elite male faculty in the life sciences employ fewer women
- (2014) J. M. Sheltzer et al. PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
- Modelling the effects of subjective and objective decision making in scientific peer review
- (2013) In-Uck Park et al. NATURE
- Bias in peer review
- (2012) Carole J. Lee et al. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
- Blinded vs. unblinded peer review of manuscripts submitted to a dermatology journal: a randomized multi-rater study
- (2011) M. Alam et al. BRITISH JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY
- Sesgos en la edición de las publicaciones científicas
- (2011) J. Matías-Guiu et al. NEUROLOGIA
- Journal peer review in context: A qualitative study of the social and subjective dimensions of manuscript review in biomedical publishing
- (2011) Wendy L. Lipworth et al. SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE
Add your recorded webinar
Do you already have a recorded webinar? Grow your audience and get more views by easily listing your recording on Peeref.
Upload NowBecome a Peeref-certified reviewer
The Peeref Institute provides free reviewer training that teaches the core competencies of the academic peer review process.
Get Started