IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/nature/v416y2002i6878d10.1038_416258a.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Peer review, unmasked

Author

Listed:
  • Trisha Gura

Abstract

The editorial review of scientific papers usually takes place behind closed doors, but could the process be improved by opening it up for all to see? Trisha Gura investigates.

Suggested Citation

  • Trisha Gura, 2002. "Peer review, unmasked," Nature, Nature, vol. 416(6878), pages 258-260, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:nat:nature:v:416:y:2002:i:6878:d:10.1038_416258a
    DOI: 10.1038/416258a
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/416258a
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/416258a?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Michail Kovanis & Ludovic Trinquart & Philippe Ravaud & Raphaël Porcher, 2017. "Evaluating alternative systems of peer review: a large-scale agent-based modelling approach to scientific publication," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 651-671, October.
    2. Pandelis Perakakis & Michael Taylor & Marco G. Mazza & Varvara Trachana, 2011. "Understanding the role of open peer review and dynamic academic articles," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(2), pages 669-673, August.
    3. Johan Bollen & David Crandall & Damion Junk & Ying Ding & Katy Börner, 2017. "An efficient system to fund science: from proposal review to peer-to-peer distributions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(1), pages 521-528, January.
    4. Xuan Zhen Liu & Hui Fang, 2012. "Peer review and over-competitive research funding fostering mainstream opinion to monopoly. Part II," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(2), pages 607-616, February.
    5. Michail Kovanis & Raphaël Porcher & Philippe Ravaud & Ludovic Trinquart, 2016. "Complex systems approach to scientific publication and peer-review system: development of an agent-based model calibrated with empirical journal data," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(2), pages 695-715, February.
    6. Hui Fang, 2011. "Peer review and over-competitive research funding fostering mainstream opinion to monopoly," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(2), pages 293-301, May.
    7. Spiro Stefanou & Kristiaan Kerstens, 2008. "Applied production analysis unveiled in open peer review: introductory remarks," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 1-6, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:nature:v:416:y:2002:i:6878:d:10.1038_416258a. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.