Crossref Citations
This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by Crossref.
Crothers, Charles
1993.
Peer review reliability: The hierarchy of the sciences.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 16,
Issue. 2,
p.
398.
Luce, R. Duncan
1993.
Reliability is neither to be expected nor desired in peer review.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 16,
Issue. 2,
p.
399.
Cicchetti, Domenic V.
1993.
The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: “It's like déjà vu all over again!”.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 16,
Issue. 2,
p.
401.
Sinclair, J. D.
1993.
Drop censorship in science.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Vol. 16,
Issue. 2,
p.
400.
Haaga, David A. F.
1993.
Peer Review of Term Papers in Graduate Psychology Courses.
Teaching of Psychology,
Vol. 20,
Issue. 1,
p.
28.
Wessely, Simon
1996.
What do we know about peer review?.
Psychological Medicine,
Vol. 26,
Issue. 5,
p.
883.
Cicchetti, Domenic V.
1997.
Do recognition-free recall discrepancies detect retrieval deficits in closed-head injury? demonstrating the inaccuracies of a reviewer's critique.
Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology,
Vol. 19,
Issue. 1,
p.
144.
Cicchetti, Domenic V.
1997.
Referees, editors, and publication practices: Improving the reliability and usefulness of the peer review system.
Science and Engineering Ethics,
Vol. 3,
Issue. 1,
p.
51.
CAMPANARIO, JUAN MIGUEL
1998.
Peer Review for Journals as it Stands Today—Part 1.
Science Communication,
Vol. 19,
Issue. 3,
p.
181.
Wessely, Simon
1998.
Peer review of grant applications: what do we know?.
The Lancet,
Vol. 352,
Issue. 9124,
p.
301.
Demicheli, V
Di Pietrantonj, C
and
Demicheli, Vittorio
2003.
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.
Starbuck, William H.
2005.
How Much Better Are the Most-Prestigious Journals? The Statistics of Academic Publication.
Organization Science,
Vol. 16,
Issue. 2,
p.
180.
Demicheli, Vittorio
and
Di Pietrantonj, Carlo
2007.
Peer review for improving the quality of grant applications.
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews,
Vol. 2010,
Issue. 1,
Bornmann, Lutz
and
Daniel, Hans‐Dieter
2008.
The Effectiveness of the Peer Review Process: Inter‐Referee Agreement and Predictive Validity of Manuscript Refereeing at Angewandte Chemie.
Angewandte Chemie International Edition,
Vol. 47,
Issue. 38,
p.
7173.
Mustaine, Elizabeth Ehrhardt
and
Tewksbury, Richard
2008.
Reviewers' Views on Reviewing: An Examination of the Peer Review Process in Criminal Justice.
Journal of Criminal Justice Education,
Vol. 19,
Issue. 3,
p.
351.
Bornmann, Lutz
and
Daniel, Hans‐Dieter
2008.
Die Effektivität des Peer‐Review‐Verfahrens: Übereinstimmungsreliabilität und Vorhersagevalidität der Manuskriptbegutachtung bei der Angewandten Chemie.
Angewandte Chemie,
Vol. 120,
Issue. 38,
p.
7285.
Bornmann, Lutz
Mutz, Rüdiger
Daniel, Hans-Dieter
and
Rogers, Simon
2010.
A Reliability-Generalization Study of Journal Peer Reviews: A Multilevel Meta-Analysis of Inter-Rater Reliability and Its Determinants.
PLoS ONE,
Vol. 5,
Issue. 12,
p.
e14331.
Lorenzo, S.
and
Carrasco, G.
2010.
Publicación Científica Biomédica.
p.
291.
Bornmann, Lutz
2011.
Scientific peer review.
Annual Review of Information Science and Technology,
Vol. 45,
Issue. 1,
p.
197.
Lee, Carole J.
2012.
A Kuhnian Critique of Psychometric Research on Peer Review.
Philosophy of Science,
Vol. 79,
Issue. 5,
p.
859.