Affiliation:
1. Metropolitan State University, USA
Abstract
The purpose of the traditional peer review process (TPR) is to provide a more constructive and scientifically rigorous critical review of scholarly research that builds scientific rigor and validity within diverse academic disciplines. Peer review has received criticism as the demand for publications in a variety of competitive journals has significantly increased while the number of individuals who are both willing and qualified to conduct thorough reviews is significantly declining. The purpose of this topic piece is to examine the overall efficacy of the peer review process and provide recommendations toward a more collaborative, transparent (i.e. “open”), and interdisciplinary communication process.
Reference22 articles.
1. A new scholar's perspective on open peer review
2. The effect of ad hominem attacks on the evaluation of claims promoted by scientists
3. Burnett HS (2017, December) On peer review, polar bears, and ad hominem. Available at: https://www.heartland.org/news-opinion/news/on-peer-review-polar-bears-and-ad-hominem
4. COPE (2020, January) COPE forum 6 march 2020: Editing of reviewer comments. Available at: https://publicationethics.org/resources/discussion-documents/cope-forum-6-march-2020-editing-reviewer-comments
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献