Recent research shows that journal reviewing practices are neither objective nor fair. I propose a procedure to increase the likelihood of publishing important papers. This will be tested by Interfaces for a year.publication, review, peers, fairness

JS Armstrong

English

Research Papers in Economics

Barriers to scientific contributions: The author's formula,&quot;

Credibility of psychologists: An empirical study,&quot;

Manuscript characteristics influencing reviewers' decisions,&quot;

Manuscript evaluation by journal referees and editors: Randomness or bias?&quot;

On changing some role relationships in the editorial review process,&quot;

On the psychology of experimental surprises,&quot;

Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again,&quot;

Peer-review research: Objections and obligations,&quot;

Publication prejudices: An experimental study of confirmatory bias in the peer review system,&quot;

Publication, politics, and scientific progress,&quot;

Publish or politic: Referee bias in manuscript review,&quot;

Reform peer review: The Peters and Ceci study in the context of other current studies of scientific evaluation,&quot;

Rejected,&quot;

Rejecting published work: Similar fate for fiction,&quot;

Reviewer 'bias': Do Peters and Ceci protest too much?&quot;

Scott (1982a), &quot;Research on scientific journals: Implications for editors and authors,&quot;

Is Review By Peers As Fair As It Appears?

http://128.118.178.162/eps/get/papers/0502/0502058.pdf

Is Review By Peers As Fair As It Appears?

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Research Papers in Economics