标题
Modelling science trustworthiness under publish or perish pressure
作者
关键词
-
出版物
Royal Society Open Science
Volume 5, Issue 1, Pages 171511
出版商
The Royal Society
发表日期
2018-01-10
DOI
10.1098/rsos.171511
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。- P values and the search for significance
- (2017) Naomi Altman et al. NATURE METHODS
- Fostering reproducible fMRI research
- (2017) NATURE NEUROSCIENCE
- Meta-assessment of bias in science
- (2017) Daniele Fanelli et al. PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
- Evolution of ReportingPValues in the Biomedical Literature, 1990-2015
- (2016) David Chavalarias et al. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
- 1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility
- (2016) Monya Baker NATURE
- Correction: On the Viability of Conspiratorial Beliefs
- (2016) David Robert Grimes PLoS One
- The natural selection of bad science
- (2016) Paul E. Smaldino et al. Royal Society Open Science
- The fickle P value generates irreproducible results
- (2015) Lewis G Halsey et al. NATURE METHODS
- Evaluation by Citation: Trends in Publication Behavior, Evaluation Criteria, and the Strive for High Impact Publications
- (2015) Maarten van Wesel SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS
- Growth rates of modern science: A bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references
- (2015) Lutz Bornmann et al. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology
- The Search for Significance: A Few Peculiarities in the Distribution of P Values in Experimental Psychology Literature
- (2015) Michał Krawczyk PLoS One
- Replication, Communication, and the Population Dynamics of Scientific Discovery
- (2015) Richard McElreath et al. PLoS One
- Publication metrics and success on the academic job market
- (2014) David van Dijk et al. CURRENT BIOLOGY
- Assessing Value in Biomedical Research
- (2014) John P. A. Ioannidis et al. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
- Increasing value and reducing waste in biomedical research regulation and management
- (2014) Rustam Al-Shahi Salman et al. LANCET
- Publication bias in the social sciences: Unlocking the file drawer
- (2014) A. Franco et al. SCIENCE
- How to Make More Published Research True
- (2014) John P. A. Ioannidis PLOS MEDICINE
- An investigation of the false discovery rate and the misinterpretation of p-values
- (2014) D. Colquhoun Royal Society Open Science
- Publication Pressure and Burn Out among Dutch Medical Professors: A Nationwide Survey
- (2013) Joeri K. Tijdink et al. PLoS One
- Raise standards for preclinical cancer research
- (2012) C. Glenn Begley et al. NATURE
- Failing the Future: Three Unsuccessful Attempts to Replicate Bem's ‘Retroactive Facilitation of Recall’ Effect
- (2012) Stuart J. Ritchie et al. PLoS One
- Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications
- (2012) F. C. Fang et al. PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
- Magnitude of effects in clinical trials published in high-impact general medical journals
- (2011) Konstantinos CM Siontis et al. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
- State of denial
- (2010) Megan Scudellari NATURE MEDICINE
- Do Pressures to Publish Increase Scientists' Bias? An Empirical Support from US States Data
- (2010) Daniele Fanelli PLoS One
- Fraud and misconduct in science: the stem cell seduction
- (2010) M. A. G. van der Heyden et al. Netherlands Heart Journal
- How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data
- (2009) Daniele Fanelli PLoS One
- Inflated numbers of authors over time have not been just due to increasing research complexity
- (2008) Stefania I. Papatheodorou et al. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
- Publish or perish, but at what cost?
- (2008) Ushma S. Neill JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION
Create your own webinar
Interested in hosting your own webinar? Check the schedule and propose your idea to the Peeref Content Team.
Create 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