Open Peer Commentary
Improving research on and policies for peer-review practices
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 04 February 2010, pp. 232-233
-
- Article
- Export citation
2004: A scenario of peer review in the future
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 04 February 2010, pp. 233-234
-
- Article
- Export citation
Reviewer reliability: Confusing random error with systematic error or bias
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 04 February 2010, pp. 234-235
-
- Article
- Export citation
Reliability and bias in peer-review practices
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 04 February 2010, pp. 235-236
-
- Article
- Export citation
Rejecting published work: Similar fate for fiction
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 04 February 2010, p. 236
-
- Article
- Export citation
Rejection, rebuttal, revision: Some flexible features of peer review
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 04 February 2010, pp. 236-237
-
- Article
- Export citation
Anosmic peer review: A rose by another name is evidently not a rose
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 04 February 2010, pp. 237-238
-
- Article
- Export citation
Referee report on an earlier draft of Peters and Ceci's target article
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 04 February 2010, p. 238
-
- Article
- Export citation
Responsibility in reviewing and research
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 04 February 2010, pp. 238-240
-
- Article
- Export citation
Perhaps it was right to reject the resubmitted manuscripts
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 04 February 2010, p. 240
-
- Article
- Export citation
Some procedural obscurities in Peters and Ceci's peer-review study
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 04 February 2010, p. 241
-
- Article
- Export citation
The quandary of manuscript reviewing
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 04 February 2010, pp. 241-242
-
- Article
- Export citation
Research on peer-review practices: Problems of interpretation, application, and propriety
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 04 February 2010, pp. 242-243
-
- Article
- Export citation
Experimenter and reviewer bias
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 04 February 2010, pp. 243-244
-
- Article
- Export citation
Competency testing for reviewers and editors
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 04 February 2010, pp. 244-245
-
- Article
- Export citation
Reliability and validity of peer review
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 04 February 2010, p. 245
-
- Article
- Export citation
Bias, incompetence, or bad management?
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 04 February 2010, pp. 245-246
-
- Article
- Export citation
Author's Response
Peer-review research: Objections and obligations
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 04 February 2010, pp. 246-255
-
- Article
- Export citation
Continuing Commentary
From the study of psychological stages to the understanding of the processes involved in the cognitive development of child and pupil
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 04 February 2010, pp. 259-260
-
- Article
- Export citation
Author's Response
Task descriptions and circularity
-
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 04 February 2010, pp. 260-261
-
- Article
- Export citation